• Chest · Oct 2016

    Review Meta Analysis

    Pulmonary rehabilitation as a mechanism to reduce hospitalizations for acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

    • Elizabeth Moore, Thomas Palmer, Roger Newson, Azeem Majeed, Jennifer K Quint, and Michael A Soljak.
    • Department of Respiratory Epidemiology Occupational Medicine and Public Health, Imperial College London, London, England. Electronic address: liz.moore@imperial.ac.uk.
    • Chest. 2016 Oct 1; 150 (4): 837-859.

    BackgroundAcute exacerbation of COPD (AECOPD) has a significant impact on health-care use, including physician visits and hospitalizations. Previous studies and reviews have shown that pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) has many benefits, but the effect on hospitalizations for AECOPD is inconclusive.MethodsA literature search was carried out to find studies that might help determine, using a meta-analysis, the impact of PR on AECOPD, defined as unscheduled or emergency hospitalizations and ED visits. Cohort studies and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting hospitalizations for AECOPD as an outcome were included. Meta-analyses compared hospitalization rates between eligible PR recipients and nonrecipients before and after rehabilitation.ResultsEighteen studies were included in the meta-analysis. Results from 10 RCTs showed that the control groups had a higher overall rate of hospitalization than did the PR groups (control groups: 0.97 hospitalizations/patient-year; 95% CI, 0.67-1.40; PR groups: 0.62 hospitalizations/patient-year; 95% CI, 0.33-1.16). Five studies compared admission numbers in the 12 months before and after rehabilitation, finding a significantly higher admission rate before compared with after (before: 1.24 hospitalizations/patient-year; 95% CI, 0.66-2.34; after: 0.47 hospitalizations/patient-year; 95% CI, 0.28-0.79). The pooled result of three cohort studies found that the reference group had a lower admission rate compared with the PR group (0.18 hospitalizations/patient-year; 95% CI, 0.11-0.32 for reference group vs 0.28 hospitalizations/patient-year; 95% CI, 0.25-0.32 for the PR group).ConclusionsAlthough results from RCTs suggested that PR reduces subsequent admissions, pooled results from the cohort studies did not, likely reflecting the heterogeneous nature of individuals included in observational research and the varying standard of PR programs.Copyright © 2016 American College of Chest Physicians. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…