Background and aim: Real-life studies report discordant prescribing of inhaled triple therapy (TT) among individuals with COPD. Guidelines recommend pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) for persistent breathlessness and/or exercise limitation. This real-life study aimed to assess the effects of in-patient PR in individuals under TT as compared to other inhaled therapies (no TT). Methods: Multicentric, retrospective analysis of data from individuals admitted to in-hospital PR. Baseline characteristics were recorded and lung function was assessed. Outcome measures were: 6-min walking test (6MWT: primary outcome), Medical Research Council (MRC) scale for dyspnoea, and COPD assessment test (CAT). Results: Data of pre and post program 6MWT of 1139 individuals were available. Pulmonary rehabilitation resulted in significant improvement in 6MWT in both groups, however, the effect size (by 54.3 ± 69.7 vs 42.5 ± 64.2 m, p = 0.004) and proportion of individuals reaching the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of 6MWT (64.2%, vs 54.3%, p = 0.001) were higher in TT group. Both groups significantly improved also the other outcome measures. The significant independent predictors of reaching the MCID of 6MWT were hospital provenience, TT use, and high eosinophils count. Conclusion: Pulmonary rehabilitation results in significant benefits in individuals with COPD irrespective of the use of TT. However, individuals under TT report larger benefits in exercise tolerance than those under no TT.

Effectiveness of pulmonary rehabilitation in individuals with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease according to inhaled therapy: The Maugeri study

Spanevello A.;
2022-01-01

Abstract

Background and aim: Real-life studies report discordant prescribing of inhaled triple therapy (TT) among individuals with COPD. Guidelines recommend pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) for persistent breathlessness and/or exercise limitation. This real-life study aimed to assess the effects of in-patient PR in individuals under TT as compared to other inhaled therapies (no TT). Methods: Multicentric, retrospective analysis of data from individuals admitted to in-hospital PR. Baseline characteristics were recorded and lung function was assessed. Outcome measures were: 6-min walking test (6MWT: primary outcome), Medical Research Council (MRC) scale for dyspnoea, and COPD assessment test (CAT). Results: Data of pre and post program 6MWT of 1139 individuals were available. Pulmonary rehabilitation resulted in significant improvement in 6MWT in both groups, however, the effect size (by 54.3 ± 69.7 vs 42.5 ± 64.2 m, p = 0.004) and proportion of individuals reaching the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of 6MWT (64.2%, vs 54.3%, p = 0.001) were higher in TT group. Both groups significantly improved also the other outcome measures. The significant independent predictors of reaching the MCID of 6MWT were hospital provenience, TT use, and high eosinophils count. Conclusion: Pulmonary rehabilitation results in significant benefits in individuals with COPD irrespective of the use of TT. However, individuals under TT report larger benefits in exercise tolerance than those under no TT.
2022
2022
file:///C:/Users/ealetti/Desktop/ASpanevello/Pubblicazioni/2022 resp med Vitacca Maugeri Study.pdf
Airflow limitation; Bronchodilators; CAT; COPD triple therapy; Dyspnoea; Exercise capacity; Exercise training; Inhaled steroids
Vitacca, M.; Paneroni, M.; Spanevello, A.; Ceriana, P.; Balbi, B.; Salvi, B.; Ambrosino, N.
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
2022 resp med Vitacca Maugeri Study.pdf

non disponibili

Tipologia: Versione Editoriale (PDF)
Licenza: Copyright dell'editore
Dimensione 2 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
2 MB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11383/2150092
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 0
  • Scopus 3
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 4
social impact