Clinician facilitated physical activity intervention versus pulmonary rehabilitation for improving physical activity in COPD: A feasibility study

B O'Neill, Orlagh O’Shea, Suzanne McDonough, Lorcan McGarvey, Ian Bradbury, Madelynne Arden, Thierry Troosters, Denise Cosgrove, Terence E McManus, McDonnell Tim, Judy Bradley

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) may not suit all individuals with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and may not result in increased physical activity. Higher levels of physical activity are associated with reduced mortality and morbidity. The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility of conducting a trial to investigate the effectiveness of a clinician-facilitated physical activity intervention (PAI) versus PR in improving physical activity in patients with COPD referred to PR. In this randomised controlled mixed methods feasibility study, all patients referred to PR who were eligible and willing were assessed at baseline and then randomised to the PAI or to PR. The assessments were repeated post-intervention and at 3-month follow-up. The main outcome was step count measured by Actigraph. Semi-structured interviews were conducted post-intervention. The N = 50 patients; mean (SD) age, 64.1(8.6) years, 24M were recruited and randomised; N = 23 (PAI) and n = 26 (PR): one patient was excluded from the analysis as that person did not meet the GOLD diagnostic criteria. Key feasibility criteria were met; recruitment was 11%, dropouts in PAI were 26% (n = 6) and 50% (n = 13/26) PR. Participants in both groups experienced a range of health benefits from their respective programmes. The PAI appears to be effective in increasing step counts in people with COPD: mean change (standard deviation) [confidence interval] for the PAI group was 972.0(3230.3)[–1080.3 to 3024.4], n = 12 and 4.3(662.7)[-440.9 to 449.5], n = 11 for the PR group. The PAI met all domains of fidelity. This study provides key information to inform a future-randomised controlled trial in physical activity.
LanguageEnglish
Pages1-11
Number of pages12
JournalCOPD: Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
Early online date5 Sep 2018
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2018

Fingerprint

Feasibility Studies
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
Rehabilitation
Exercise
Lung
Insurance Benefits
Randomized Controlled Trials
Confidence Intervals
Interviews
Morbidity

Keywords

  • COPD
  • Physical activity
  • Pulmonary Rehabilitation

Cite this

O'Neill, B ; O’Shea, Orlagh ; McDonough, Suzanne ; McGarvey, Lorcan ; Bradbury, Ian ; Arden, Madelynne ; Troosters, Thierry ; Cosgrove, Denise ; McManus, Terence E ; Tim, McDonnell ; Bradley, Judy. / Clinician facilitated physical activity intervention versus pulmonary rehabilitation for improving physical activity in COPD: A feasibility study. In: COPD: Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. 2018 ; pp. 1-11.
@article{7ced8b870c304c7cb5c7a2a2f179711e,
title = "Clinician facilitated physical activity intervention versus pulmonary rehabilitation for improving physical activity in COPD: A feasibility study",
abstract = "Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) may not suit all individuals with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and may not result in increased physical activity. Higher levels of physical activity are associated with reduced mortality and morbidity. The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility of conducting a trial to investigate the effectiveness of a clinician-facilitated physical activity intervention (PAI) versus PR in improving physical activity in patients with COPD referred to PR. In this randomised controlled mixed methods feasibility study, all patients referred to PR who were eligible and willing were assessed at baseline and then randomised to the PAI or to PR. The assessments were repeated post-intervention and at 3-month follow-up. The main outcome was step count measured by Actigraph. Semi-structured interviews were conducted post-intervention. The N = 50 patients; mean (SD) age, 64.1(8.6) years, 24M were recruited and randomised; N = 23 (PAI) and n = 26 (PR): one patient was excluded from the analysis as that person did not meet the GOLD diagnostic criteria. Key feasibility criteria were met; recruitment was 11{\%}, dropouts in PAI were 26{\%} (n = 6) and 50{\%} (n = 13/26) PR. Participants in both groups experienced a range of health benefits from their respective programmes. The PAI appears to be effective in increasing step counts in people with COPD: mean change (standard deviation) [confidence interval] for the PAI group was 972.0(3230.3)[–1080.3 to 3024.4], n = 12 and 4.3(662.7)[-440.9 to 449.5], n = 11 for the PR group. The PAI met all domains of fidelity. This study provides key information to inform a future-randomised controlled trial in physical activity.",
keywords = "COPD, Physical activity, Pulmonary Rehabilitation",
author = "B O'Neill and Orlagh O’Shea and Suzanne McDonough and Lorcan McGarvey and Ian Bradbury and Madelynne Arden and Thierry Troosters and Denise Cosgrove and McManus, {Terence E} and McDonnell Tim and Judy Bradley",
year = "2018",
doi = "10.1080/15412555.2018.1486396",
language = "English",
pages = "1--11",
journal = "COPD: Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease",
issn = "1541-2555",

}

Clinician facilitated physical activity intervention versus pulmonary rehabilitation for improving physical activity in COPD: A feasibility study. / O'Neill, B; O’Shea, Orlagh; McDonough, Suzanne; McGarvey, Lorcan; Bradbury, Ian; Arden, Madelynne; Troosters, Thierry; Cosgrove, Denise; McManus, Terence E; Tim, McDonnell; Bradley, Judy.

In: COPD: Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, 2018, p. 1-11.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Clinician facilitated physical activity intervention versus pulmonary rehabilitation for improving physical activity in COPD: A feasibility study

AU - O'Neill, B

AU - O’Shea, Orlagh

AU - McDonough, Suzanne

AU - McGarvey, Lorcan

AU - Bradbury, Ian

AU - Arden, Madelynne

AU - Troosters, Thierry

AU - Cosgrove, Denise

AU - McManus, Terence E

AU - Tim, McDonnell

AU - Bradley, Judy

PY - 2018

Y1 - 2018

N2 - Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) may not suit all individuals with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and may not result in increased physical activity. Higher levels of physical activity are associated with reduced mortality and morbidity. The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility of conducting a trial to investigate the effectiveness of a clinician-facilitated physical activity intervention (PAI) versus PR in improving physical activity in patients with COPD referred to PR. In this randomised controlled mixed methods feasibility study, all patients referred to PR who were eligible and willing were assessed at baseline and then randomised to the PAI or to PR. The assessments were repeated post-intervention and at 3-month follow-up. The main outcome was step count measured by Actigraph. Semi-structured interviews were conducted post-intervention. The N = 50 patients; mean (SD) age, 64.1(8.6) years, 24M were recruited and randomised; N = 23 (PAI) and n = 26 (PR): one patient was excluded from the analysis as that person did not meet the GOLD diagnostic criteria. Key feasibility criteria were met; recruitment was 11%, dropouts in PAI were 26% (n = 6) and 50% (n = 13/26) PR. Participants in both groups experienced a range of health benefits from their respective programmes. The PAI appears to be effective in increasing step counts in people with COPD: mean change (standard deviation) [confidence interval] for the PAI group was 972.0(3230.3)[–1080.3 to 3024.4], n = 12 and 4.3(662.7)[-440.9 to 449.5], n = 11 for the PR group. The PAI met all domains of fidelity. This study provides key information to inform a future-randomised controlled trial in physical activity.

AB - Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) may not suit all individuals with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and may not result in increased physical activity. Higher levels of physical activity are associated with reduced mortality and morbidity. The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility of conducting a trial to investigate the effectiveness of a clinician-facilitated physical activity intervention (PAI) versus PR in improving physical activity in patients with COPD referred to PR. In this randomised controlled mixed methods feasibility study, all patients referred to PR who were eligible and willing were assessed at baseline and then randomised to the PAI or to PR. The assessments were repeated post-intervention and at 3-month follow-up. The main outcome was step count measured by Actigraph. Semi-structured interviews were conducted post-intervention. The N = 50 patients; mean (SD) age, 64.1(8.6) years, 24M were recruited and randomised; N = 23 (PAI) and n = 26 (PR): one patient was excluded from the analysis as that person did not meet the GOLD diagnostic criteria. Key feasibility criteria were met; recruitment was 11%, dropouts in PAI were 26% (n = 6) and 50% (n = 13/26) PR. Participants in both groups experienced a range of health benefits from their respective programmes. The PAI appears to be effective in increasing step counts in people with COPD: mean change (standard deviation) [confidence interval] for the PAI group was 972.0(3230.3)[–1080.3 to 3024.4], n = 12 and 4.3(662.7)[-440.9 to 449.5], n = 11 for the PR group. The PAI met all domains of fidelity. This study provides key information to inform a future-randomised controlled trial in physical activity.

KW - COPD

KW - Physical activity

KW - Pulmonary Rehabilitation

U2 - 10.1080/15412555.2018.1486396

DO - 10.1080/15412555.2018.1486396

M3 - Article

SP - 1

EP - 11

JO - COPD: Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

T2 - COPD: Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

JF - COPD: Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

SN - 1541-2555

ER -