Physical therapy · 2023
Pulmonary Rehabilitation Using Minimal Equipment for People With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
МетаанализСистематический обзорСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Cheng Sonia Wing Mei, McKeough Zoe J, McNamara Renae J, Alison Jennifer A
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Pulmonary rehabilitation programs that use minimal equipment for exercise training, rather than gymnasium equipment, would enable delivery of pulmonary rehabilitation to a greater number of people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The effectiveness of minimal equipment programs in people with COPD is unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine the effects of pulmonary rehabilitation using minimal equipment for aerobic and/or resistance training in people with COPD.
METHODS: Literature databases were searched up to September 2022 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effect of minimal equipment programs with usual care or with exercise equipment-based programs for exercise capacity, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and strength.
RESULTS: Nineteen RCTs were included in the review and 14 RCTs were included in the meta-analyses, which reported low to moderate certainty of evidence. Compared with usual care, minimal equipment programs increased 6-minute walk distance (6MWD) by 85 m (95% CI = 37 to 132 m). No difference in 6MWD was observed between minimal equipment and exercise equipment-based programs (14 m, 95% CI = -27 to 56 m). Minimal equipment programs were more effective than usual care for improving HRQoL (standardized mean difference = 0.99, 95% CI = 0.31 to 1.67) and were not different from exercise equipment-based programs for improving upper limb strength (6 N, 95% CI = -2 to 13 N) or lower limb strength (20 N, 95% CI = -30 to 71 N).
CONCLUSION: In people with COPD, pulmonary rehabilitation programs using minimal equipment elicit clinically significant improvements in 6MWD and HRQoL and are comparable with exercise equipment-based programs for improving 6MWD and strength.
IMPACT: Pulmonary rehabilitation programs using minimal equipment may be a suitable alternative in settings where access to gymnasium equipment is limited. Delivery of pulmonary rehabilitation programs using minimal equipment may improve access to pulmonary rehabilitation worldwide, particularly in rural and remote areas and in developing countries.
METHODS: Literature databases were searched up to September 2022 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effect of minimal equipment programs with usual care or with exercise equipment-based programs for exercise capacity, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and strength.
RESULTS: Nineteen RCTs were included in the review and 14 RCTs were included in the meta-analyses, which reported low to moderate certainty of evidence. Compared with usual care, minimal equipment programs increased 6-minute walk distance (6MWD) by 85 m (95% CI = 37 to 132 m). No difference in 6MWD was observed between minimal equipment and exercise equipment-based programs (14 m, 95% CI = -27 to 56 m). Minimal equipment programs were more effective than usual care for improving HRQoL (standardized mean difference = 0.99, 95% CI = 0.31 to 1.67) and were not different from exercise equipment-based programs for improving upper limb strength (6 N, 95% CI = -2 to 13 N) or lower limb strength (20 N, 95% CI = -30 to 71 N).
CONCLUSION: In people with COPD, pulmonary rehabilitation programs using minimal equipment elicit clinically significant improvements in 6MWD and HRQoL and are comparable with exercise equipment-based programs for improving 6MWD and strength.
IMPACT: Pulmonary rehabilitation programs using minimal equipment may be a suitable alternative in settings where access to gymnasium equipment is limited. Delivery of pulmonary rehabilitation programs using minimal equipment may improve access to pulmonary rehabilitation worldwide, particularly in rural and remote areas and in developing countries.