Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Thorax logoLink to Thorax
. 2001 Feb;56(2):143–145. doi: 10.1136/thorax.56.2.143

A randomised controlled trial of four weeks versus seven weeks of pulmonary rehabilitation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

R Green 1, S Singh 1, J Williams 1, M Morgan 1
PMCID: PMC1746003  PMID: 11209104

Abstract

BACKGROUND—Pulmonary rehabilitation programmes have been shown to improve both exercise tolerance and health status in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The optimal duration for a pulmonary rehabilitation programme is, however, unknown. To assess whether the current pulmonary rehabilitation programme could be shortened a randomised controlled trial was conducted in 44 patients with COPD who were allocated to either a seven week or a four week course.
METHODS—Patients were randomised to either our standard seven week twice weekly outpatient based programme or a comparable but shortened four week course. They were assessed at baseline and at completion by the Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire (CRQ), the Breathing Problems Questionnaire (BPQ), the incremental shuttle walking test (SWT), and the treadmill endurance test (TET).
RESULTS—Twenty one patients (61% men) of mean (SD) age 68 (9.2) years and forced expiratory volume in one second ( FEV1) 1.08 (0.4) l completed a conventional seven week course and 23 (67% men) of mean (SD) age 69 (8.8) years and FEV1 1.03 (0.3) l completed a shortened four week course. Patients who completed the seven week rehabilitation programme had greater improvements in all outcome measures than those undertaking the four week course. These differences reached clinical and statistical significance for the total CRQ score, which was the primary outcome variable (mean difference (95% confidence intervals (CI) of difference) -0.61(-0.15 to -1.08), p<0.05), and the CRQ domains of dyspnoea (-0.80 (95% CI -0.13 to -1.48), p<0.05), emotion (-0.89 (95% CI -0.33 to -1.45), p<0.005), and mastery (-0.84 (95% CI -0.10 to -1.58), p<0.05). There were also trends towards greater improvements in exercise assessments in the seven week group but the differences did not reach statistical significance (SWT: mean difference -16.9 (95% CI 24.8 to -58.6), p=0.41; TET: geometric mean difference -1.21 (95% CI -0.60 to -2.47), p=0.56).
CONCLUSIONS—A seven week course of pulmonary rehabilitation provides greater benefits to patients than a four week course in terms of improvements in health status. Larger prospective studies are required to determine the optimal duration of a pulmonary rehabilitation programme.



Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (85.4 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Goldstein R. S., Gort E. H., Stubbing D., Avendano M. A., Guyatt G. H. Randomised controlled trial of respiratory rehabilitation. Lancet. 1994 Nov 19;344(8934):1394–1397. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(94)90568-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Griffiths T. L., Burr M. L., Campbell I. A., Lewis-Jenkins V., Mullins J., Shiels K., Turner-Lawlor P. J., Payne N., Newcombe R. G., Ionescu A. A. Results at 1 year of outpatient multidisciplinary pulmonary rehabilitation: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2000 Jan 29;355(9201):362–368. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(99)07042-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Guyatt G. H., Townsend M., Berman L. B., Pugsley S. O. Quality of life in patients with chronic airflow limitation. Br J Dis Chest. 1987 Jan;81(1):45–54. doi: 10.1016/0007-0971(87)90107-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Hyland M. E., Singh S. J., Sodergren S. C., Morgan M. P. Development of a shortened version of the Breathing Problems Questionnaire suitable for use in a pulmonary rehabilitation clinic: a purpose-specific, disease-specific questionnaire. Qual Life Res. 1998 Apr;7(3):227–233. doi: 10.1023/a:1024921610972. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Lacasse Y., Wong E., Guyatt G. H., King D., Cook D. J., Goldstein R. S. Meta-analysis of respiratory rehabilitation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Lancet. 1996 Oct 26;348(9035):1115–1119. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(96)04201-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Redelmeier D. A., Guyatt G. H., Goldstein R. S. Assessing the minimal important difference in symptoms: a comparison of two techniques. J Clin Epidemiol. 1996 Nov;49(11):1215–1219. doi: 10.1016/s0895-4356(96)00206-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Ries A. L., Kaplan R. M., Limberg T. M., Prewitt L. M. Effects of pulmonary rehabilitation on physiologic and psychosocial outcomes in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Ann Intern Med. 1995 Jun 1;122(11):823–832. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-122-11-199506010-00003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Singh S. J., Morgan M. D., Hardman A. E., Rowe C., Bardsley P. A. Comparison of oxygen uptake during a conventional treadmill test and the shuttle walking test in chronic airflow limitation. Eur Respir J. 1994 Nov;7(11):2016–2020. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Singh S. J., Morgan M. D., Scott S., Walters D., Hardman A. E. Development of a shuttle walking test of disability in patients with chronic airways obstruction. Thorax. 1992 Dec;47(12):1019–1024. doi: 10.1136/thx.47.12.1019. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Singh S. J., Smith D. L., Hyland M. E., Morgan M. D. A short outpatient pulmonary rehabilitation programme: immediate and longer-term effects on exercise performance and quality of life. Respir Med. 1998 Sep;92(9):1146–1154. doi: 10.1016/s0954-6111(98)90410-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Wijkstra P. J., Ten Vergert E. M., van Altena R., Otten V., Kraan J., Postma D. S., Koëter G. H. Long term benefits of rehabilitation at home on quality of life and exercise tolerance in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Thorax. 1995 Aug;50(8):824–828. doi: 10.1136/thx.50.8.824. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Thorax are provided here courtesy of BMJ Publishing Group

RESOURCES