BMJ open · 2019
Is inspiratory muscle training (IMT) an acceptable treatment option for people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) who have declined pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) and can IMT enhance PR uptake? A single-group prepost feasibility study in a home-based setting.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
O'Connor Cath, Lawson Rod, Waterhouse Judith, Mills Gary H
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: This feasibility study aimed to assess the acceptability of inspiratory muscle training (IMT) in people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) who declined pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) as a potential treatment option or precursor to PR. Objectives were to assess attitudes to IMT, PR and alternatives to PR; factors influencing adherence with IMT and acceptability of outcome measures, research tools and study protocol.
DESIGN: A pragmatic, mixed methods, prepost feasibility study was conducted. Recruitment took place over a 4-month period. Participants were followed up for a period of 6 months.
SETTINGS: IMT sessions and assessments were conducted in the domiciliary setting.
PARTICIPANTS: Inclusion criteria: people over the age of 35, stable COPD, Medical Research Council Dyspnoea scale of 3 or above, declined PR.
EXCLUSION CRITERIA: history of spontaneous pneumothorax, incomplete recovery from a traumatic pneumothorax, asthma, known recently perforated eardrum, unstable angina, ventricular dysrhythmias, cerebrovascular event or myocardial infarction within the last 2 months. Participants were selected from a purposive sample. Of the 22 potential participants screened, 11 were recruited and interviewed. Ten participants commenced IMT. Seven participants completed the follow-up assessment.
INTERVENTION: Eight weeks of IMT twice a day, 5 days a week with visits once weekly by a physiotherapist. Unsupervised IMT twice a day three times a week until follow-up at 6 months.
OUTCOMES: Acceptability of IMT and the study process was explored via semi-structured interviews. Adherence with IMT was assessed by the Powerbreathe K3 device and participant diaries. Uptake of PR was identified.
RESULTS: IMT was found to be acceptable. Adherence was explored. Four people went on to participate in PR.
CONCLUSIONS: Feasibility was established. A randomised controlled trial is warranted to establish efficacy and cost-effectiveness of IMT in those who decline PR and IMT as an intervention to promote uptake of PR.
TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01956565; Post-results.
DESIGN: A pragmatic, mixed methods, prepost feasibility study was conducted. Recruitment took place over a 4-month period. Participants were followed up for a period of 6 months.
SETTINGS: IMT sessions and assessments were conducted in the domiciliary setting.
PARTICIPANTS: Inclusion criteria: people over the age of 35, stable COPD, Medical Research Council Dyspnoea scale of 3 or above, declined PR.
EXCLUSION CRITERIA: history of spontaneous pneumothorax, incomplete recovery from a traumatic pneumothorax, asthma, known recently perforated eardrum, unstable angina, ventricular dysrhythmias, cerebrovascular event or myocardial infarction within the last 2 months. Participants were selected from a purposive sample. Of the 22 potential participants screened, 11 were recruited and interviewed. Ten participants commenced IMT. Seven participants completed the follow-up assessment.
INTERVENTION: Eight weeks of IMT twice a day, 5 days a week with visits once weekly by a physiotherapist. Unsupervised IMT twice a day three times a week until follow-up at 6 months.
OUTCOMES: Acceptability of IMT and the study process was explored via semi-structured interviews. Adherence with IMT was assessed by the Powerbreathe K3 device and participant diaries. Uptake of PR was identified.
RESULTS: IMT was found to be acceptable. Adherence was explored. Four people went on to participate in PR.
CONCLUSIONS: Feasibility was established. A randomised controlled trial is warranted to establish efficacy and cost-effectiveness of IMT in those who decline PR and IMT as an intervention to promote uptake of PR.
TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01956565; Post-results.