Chest
The Effect of Comprehensive Outpatient Pulmonary Rehabilitation on Dyspnea
Section snippets
Patients
Patients referred to our OPR program were considered for the study. Inclusion criteria included the following: (1) a clinical diagnosis of moderately severe to severe COPD; (2) a significant exertional dyspnea despite conventional medical therapy; (3) an FEV1 equal to or less than 1.4 L; and (4) the absence of significant, associated medical problems that might interfere with the patient's ability to undergo OPR. Because our oxygen analyzer for treadmill exercise testing was not accurate at
Patients
Age, sex, FEV1, 12-min walking distance, and BDI focal scores of the 20 study patients are given in Table 1. As indicated, all had moderately severe to severe airways obstruction. Although baseline FEV1 tended to be somewhat lower in C than T patients (0.79 ± 0.18 L vs 0.94 ± 0.32 L), this difference was not statistically significant. Both groups were similar with respect to exercise endurance, as measured by the 12-min walk distance, and overall dyspnea, as measured by the BDI focal score.
Baseline Exercise Testing—Pre-exercise and Maximal Workload Values
DISCUSSION
The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate the effect of OPR on dyspnea in advanced COPD. One group of patients was studied before and after OPR while a control group was studied before and after a waiting period. Exertional dyspnea during graded treadmill exercise testing was measured with a visual analogue scale, while overall impairment from dyspnea was measured with the baseline and transitional dyspnea indices. A decrease in dyspnea at maximal workload was observed only in the group
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The writers thank Bartolome Celli, M.D., Chief, Pulmonary Section, Boston VA Medical Center, for valuable assistance during the planning of this study.
REFERENCES (22)
- et al.
Benefits of a multidisciplinary pulmonary rehabilitation program: improvements are independent of lung function?
Chest
(1991) - et al.
Predictors of improvement in the 12-minute walking distance following a 6-week outpatient pulmonary rehabilitation program?
Chest
(1991) - et al.
The measurement of dyspnea: contents, interobserver agreement, and physiologic correlates of two new clinical indexes?
Chest
(1984) - et al.
Impact of dyspnea and physiologic function on general health status in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease?
Chest
(1992) - et al.
Dyspnea in the patient with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease?
Clin Chest Med
(1990) - et al.
Psychosocial concomitants to rehabilitation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease?
Chest
(1980) - et al.
Variability of breathlessness measurement in patients with COPD?
Chest
(1991) - et al.
Randomised controlled trial of rehabilitation in chronic respiratory disability?
Thorax
(1981) - et al.
Multidiscipline treatment of chronic pulmonary insufficiency: I. Psychologic aspects of rehabilitation?
Psychosom Med
(1973) Psychophysical basis of perceived exertion?
Med Sci Sports Exerc
(1982)
Clinical exercise testing
Cited by (176)
Effect of pulmonary rehabilitation programs including lower limb endurance training on dyspnea in stable COPD: A systematic review and meta-analysis
2020, Respiratory InvestigationCitation Excerpt :On average, participants allocated to rehabilitation programs had significantly greater changes in MRC (MD, −0.64; 95% CI, −0.99 to −0.30; p = 0.0003; I2 = 68%) (Fig. 3A). Transitional dyspnea index (TDI) was evaluated in 5 studies with 187 participants [26,29,32–34]. The mean change in TDI was significantly greater in the intervention group than in the control group (MD, 1.95; 95% CI, 1.09 to 2.81; p = 0.0001; I2 = 65%) (Fig. 3B).
Is the six-minute walk test a useful tool to prescribe high-intensity exercise in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease?
2016, Heart and Lung: Journal of Acute and Critical CarePulmonary Rehabilitation
2015, Murray and Nadel's Textbook of Respiratory Medicine: Volume 1,2, Sixth EditionPulmonary rehabilitation for patients with chronic airways obstruction
2015, Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology: In Practice
Manuscript received March 26, 1993; revision accepted August 31