Improving exercise-based interventions for people living with both COPD and frailty: a realist review

Background: People living with both chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and frailty have high potential to benefit from exercise-based interventions, including pulmonary rehabilitation, but face challenges completing them. Research to understand ways to optimise exercise-based interventions in this group is lacking. We aimed to understand how exercise-based interventions might improve outcomes for people living with both COPD and frailty. Methods: This realist review used database searches and handsearching until October 2019 to identify articles of relevance to exercise-based interventions for people living with COPD and frailty. A scoping search explored what is important about the context of living with COPD and frailty, and what mechanisms might be important in how exercise-based interventions result in their intended outcomes. Through discussion with stakeholders, the review scope was refined to areas deemed pertinent to improving care. We retained articles within this refined scope and identified additional articles through targeted handsearching. Data were extracted and synthesised in a narrative, prioritised by relevance and rigour. Results: Of 344 records identified, 35 were included in the review and 20 informed the final synthesis. Important contextual factors to consider included: negative beliefs about themselves and exercise-based interventions; heterogenous presentation and comorbidities; decreased reserves and multidimensional loss; and experiencing unpredictable health and disruptions. In these circumstances, mechanisms that may help maximise outcomes from exercise-based interventions included: trusting relationships; creating a shared understanding of needs; having the capacity to address multidimensional concerns; being able to individualise approaches to needs and priorities; and flexible approaches to intervention delivery. Mixed-methods research and explicit theorising were often absent. Conclusion: Building trusting relationships, understanding priorities, using individualised and multidisciplinary approaches, and flexible service delivery can improve the value of exercise-based interventions for people living with both COPD and frailty. Development and evaluation of new and adapted interventions should consider these principles

Digital habits of pulmonary rehabilitation service-users following the COVID-19 pandemic

Objective: We previously demonstrated low levels of digital literacy amongst pulmonary rehabilitation service-users prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. We aimed to identify whether the pandemic accelerated digital literacy in this population, resulting in greater acceptance of remote web-based pulmonary rehabilitation programme models. Methods: We surveyed digital access and behaviours and pulmonary rehabilitation delivery preferences of service-users referred to pulmonary rehabilitation in 2021 (cohort 2021) and propensity score-matched them to a cohort who completed the survey in 2020 (cohort 2020). Results: There were indicators that digital access and confidence were better amongst the Cohort 2021 but no difference was seen in the proportion of patients choosing remote web-based pulmonary rehabilitation as an acceptable method of receiving pulmonary rehabilitation. Conclusion: In an unselected cohort of service-users, remote web-based pulmonary rehabilitation was considered acceptable in only a minority of patients which has implications on healthcare commissioning and delivery of pulmonary rehabilitation

Frailty and Mortality Risk in COPD: A Cohort Study Comparing the Fried Frailty Phenotype and Short Physical Performance Battery

Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Background: Identifying frailty in people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is deemed important, yet comparative characteristics of the most commonly used frailty measures in COPD are unknown. This study aimed to compare how the Fried Frailty Phenotype (FFP) and Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB) characterise frailty in people with stable COPD, including prevalence of and overlap in identification of frailty, disease and health characteristics of those identified as living with frailty, and predictive value in relation to survival time. Methods: Cohort study of people with stable COPD attending outpatient clinics. Agreement between frailty classifications was described using Cohen’s Kappa. Disease and health characteristics of frail versus not frail participants were compared using t-, Mann–Whitney U and Chi-Square tests. Predictive value for mortality was examined with multivariable Cox regression. Results: Of 714 participants, 421 (59%) were male, mean age 69.9 years (SD 9.7), mean survival time 2270 days (95% CI 2185– 2355). Similar proportions were identified as frail using the FFP (26.2%) and SPPB (23.7%) measures; classifications as frail or not frail matched in 572 (80.1%) cases, showing moderate agreement (Kappa = 0.469, SE = 0.038, p < 0.001). Discrepancies seemed driven by FFP exhaustion and weight loss criteria and the SPPB balance component. People with frailty by either measure had worse exercise capacity, health-related quality of life, breathlessness, depression and dependence in activities of daily living. In multivariable analysis controlling for the Age Dyspnoea Obstruction index, sex, BMI, comorbidities and exercise capacity, both the FFP and SPPB had predictive value in relation to mortality (FFP aHR = 1.31 [95% CI 1.03– 1.66]; SPPB aHR = 1.29 [95% CI 0.99– 1.68]). Conclusion: In stable COPD, both the FFP and SPPB identify similar proportions of people living with/without frailty, the majority with matching classifications. Both measures can identify individuals with multidimensional health challenges and increased mortality risk and provide additional information alongside established prognostic variables.Medical Research Council New Investigator Research Grant and a National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Clinician Scientist Award (DHCS/07/07/009) held by WDCM and a NIHR Career Development Fellowship (CDF-2017-10-009) held by MM. RB is funded an NIHR Clinical Doctoral Research Fellowship (ICA-CDRF-2017-03-018). CE is funded by a Health Education England/National Institute of Health Research Senior Clinical Lectureship (ICA-SCL-2015-01-001)

Pulmonary Rehabilitation in Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis and COPD: A Propensity-Matched Real-World Study

Supplementary data available at: https://journal.chestnet.org/cms/10.1016/j.chest.2021.10.021/attachment/814ea172-99e4-4122-8fd1-15c25422db75/mmc1.pdf (21MB).Cpyright © 2021 The Author(s). Background: The adherence to and clinical efficacy of pulmonary rehabilitation in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF), particularly in comparison with COPD, remains uncertain. The objectives of this real-world study were to compare the responses of patients with IPF with a matched group of patients with COPD undergoing the same supervised, outpatient pulmonary rehabilitation program and to determine whether pulmonary rehabilitation is associated with survival in IPF. Research Question: Do people with IPF improve to the same extent with pulmonary rehabilitation as a matched group of individuals with COPD, and are noncompletion of or nonresponse to pulmonary rehabilitation, or both, associated with 1-year all-cause mortality in IPF? Study Design and Methods: Using propensity score matching, 163 patients with IPF were matched 1:1 with a control group of 163 patients with COPD referred for pulmonary rehabilitation. We compared between-group pulmonary rehabilitation completion rates and response. Survival status in the IPF cohort was recorded over 1 year after pulmonary rehabilitation discharge. Cox proportional hazards regression explored the association between pulmonary rehabilitation status and all-cause mortality. Results: Similar pulmonary rehabilitation completion rates (IPF, 69%; COPD, 63%; P = .24) and improvements in exercise response were observed in both groups with no significant mean between-group differences in incremental shuttle walk test (ISWT) change (mean, 2 m [95% CI, –18 to 22 m]). Pulmonary rehabilitation noncompletion (hazard ratio [HR], 5.62 [95% CI, 2.24-14.08]) and nonresponse (HR, 3.91 [95% CI, 1.54-9.93]) were associated independently with increased 1-year all-cause mortality in IPF. Interpretation: This real-word study demonstrated that patients with IPF have similar completion rates and magnitude of response to pulmonary rehabilitation compared with a matched group of patients with COPD. In IPF, noncompletion of and nonresponse to pulmonary rehabilitation were associated with increased all-cause mortality. These data reinforce the benefits of pulmonary rehabilitation in patients with IPF.National Institute for Health Research Doctoral Research Fellowship [No. 2014-07-089 ] and a Medical Research Council New Investigator Research Grant [No. 98576 ]. T. M. M. is supported by a National Institute for Health Research Clinician Scientist Fellowship [Grant: CS-2013-13-017 ] and is a British Lung Foundation Chair in Respiratory Research [Grant: C17-3 ]. W. D.-C. M. is supported by the National Institute for Health Research and the British Lung Foundation

Integrating home-based exercise training with a hospital at home service for patients hospitalised with acute exacerbations of COPD: Developing the model using accelerated experience-based Co-design

Background: Hospital at home (HaH) schemes allow early discharge of patients hospitalised with an acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD). Traditional outpatient pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) following an AECOPD has an established evidence-base, but there are issues with low referral, uptake and completion. One commonly cited barrier to PR post-hospitalisation relates to poor accessibility. To address this, the aim of this project was to enrol service users (patients with COPD and informal carers) and healthcare professionals to co-design a model of care that integrates home-based exercise training within a HaH scheme for patients discharged from hospital following AECOPD. Methods: This accelerated experience-based co-design project included three audio-recorded stakeholder feedback events, using key “touchpoints” from previous qualitative interviews and a recent systematic review. Audio-recordings were inductively analysed using directed content analysis. An integrated model of care was then developed and finalised through two co-design groups, with the decision-making process facilitated by the tables of changes approach. Results: Seven patients with COPD, two informal carers and nine healthcare professionals (from an existing outpatient PR service and HaH scheme) participated in the stakeholder feedback events. Four key themes were identified: 1) individualisation, 2) progression and transition, 3) continuity between services, and 4) communication between stakeholders. Two patients with COPD, one informal carer and three healthcare professionals participated in the first joint co-design group, with five healthcare professionals attending a second co-design group. These achieved a consensus on the integrated model of care. The agreed model comprised face-to-face supervised, individually tailored home-based exercise training one to three times a week, delivered during HaH scheme visits where possible by a healthcare professional competent to provide both home-based exercise training and usual HaH care. Conclusion: An integrated model of care has been co-designed by patients with COPD, informal carers and healthcare professionals to address low uptake and completion of PR following AECOPD. The co-designed model of care has now been integrated within a well-established HaH scheme

COPD discharge bundle and pulmonary rehabilitation referral and uptake following hospitalisation for acute exacerbation of COPD

Supplementary Data: This web only file has been produced by the BMJ Publishing Group from an electronic file supplied by the author(s) and has not been edited for content: Data supplement 1 available at: https://thorax.bmj.com/highwire/filestream/198799/field_highwire_adjunct_files/0/thoraxjnl-2020-215464supp001_data_supplement.pdfCopyright © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) following hospitalisations for acute exacerbation of COPD (AECOPD) is associated with improved exercise capacity and quality of life, and reduced readmissions. However, referral for, and uptake of, post-hospitalisation PR are low. In this prospective cohort study of 291 consecutive hospitalisations for AECOPD, COPD discharge bundles delivered by PR practitioners compared with non-PR practitioners were associated with increased PR referral (60% vs 12%, p<0.001; adjusted OR: 14.46, 95% CI: 5.28 to 39.57) and uptake (40% vs 32%, p=0.001; adjusted OR: 8.60, 95% CI: 2.51 to 29.50). Closer integration between hospital and PR services may increase post-hospitalisation PR referral and uptake.National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) under its Clinical Doctoral Fellowship Programme (Fellowship Reference Number ICA-CDRF-2017-03-018); NIHR Doctoral Research Fellowship (DRF-2014-07-089) and a NIHR Clinical Trials Fellowship (CTF-2017-06-005); NIHR Career Development Fellowship (CDF-2017-10-009) and NIHR Applied Research Collaboration South London; NIHR Applied Research Collaboration East of England programme

Muscle stimulation in advanced idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: A randomised placebo-controlled feasibility study

Objectives To assess the acceptability of neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) of the quadriceps muscles in people with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) and to identify whether a future definitive trial is feasible. Design A randomised, parallel, two-group, participant and assessor-blinded, placebo-controlled feasibility trial with embedded qualitative interviews. Setting Outpatient department, Royal Brompton and Harefield Hospitals. Participants Twenty-two people with IPF: median (25th, 75th centiles) age 76 (74, 82) years, forced vital capacity 62 (50, 75) % predicted, 6min walk test distance 289 (149, 360) m. Interventions Usual care (home-based exercise, weekly telephone support, breathlessness management leaflet) with either placebo or active NMES for 6weeks, with follow-up at 6 and 12 weeks. Primary outcome measures Feasibility of recruitment and retention, treatment uptake and adherence, outcome assessments, participant and outcome assessor blinding and adverse events related to interventions. Secondary outcome measures Outcome measures with potential to be primary or secondary outcomes in a definitive clinical trial. In addition, purposively sampled participants were interviewed to capture their experiences and acceptability of the trial. Results Out of 364 people screened, 23 were recruited: 11 were allocated to each group and one was withdrawn prior to randomisation. Compared with the control group, a greater proportion of the intervention group completed the intervention, remained in the trial blinded to group allocation and experienced intervention-related adverse events. Assessor blinding was maintained. The secondary outcome measures were feasible with most missing data associated with the accelerometer. Small participant numbers precluded identification of an outcome measure suitable for a definitive trial. Qualitative findings demonstrated that trial process and active NMES were acceptable but there were concerns about the credibility of placebo NMES. Conclusions Primarily owing to recruitment difficulties, a definitive trial using the current protocol to evaluate NMES in people with IPF is not feasible. Trial registration number NCT03499275.British Lung Foundation IPF Project Grant (grant number IPF/PG/17-15

Prevalence of physical frailty, including risk factors, up to 1 year after hospitalisation for COVID-19 in the UK: a multicentre, longitudinal cohort study

Data sharing statement: The protocol, consent form, definition and derivation of clinical characteristics and outcomes, training materials, regulatory documents, information about requests for data access, and other relevant study materials are available online at https://www.phosp.org/Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Background: The scale of COVID-19 and its well documented long-term sequelae support a need to understand long-term outcomes including frailty. Methods: This prospective cohort study recruited adults who had survived hospitalisation with clinically diagnosed COVID-19 across 35 sites in the UK (PHOSP-COVID). The burden of frailty was objectively measured using Fried's Frailty Phenotype (FFP). The primary outcome was the prevalence of each FFP group—robust (no FFP criteria), pre-frail (one or two FFP criteria) and frail (three or more FFP criteria)—at 5 months and 1 year after discharge from hospital. For inclusion in the primary analysis, participants required complete outcome data for three of the five FFP criteria. Longitudinal changes across frailty domains are reported at 5 months and 1 year post-hospitalisation, along with risk factors for frailty status. Patient-perceived recovery and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) were retrospectively rated for pre-COVID-19 and prospectively rated at the 5 month and 1 year visits. This study is registered with ISRCTN, number ISRCTN10980107. Findings: Between March 5, 2020, and March 31, 2021, 2419 participants were enrolled with FFP data. Mean age was 57.9 (SD 12.6) years, 933 (38.6%) were female, and 429 (17.7%) had received invasive mechanical ventilation. 1785 had measures at both timepoints, of which 240 (13.4%), 1138 (63.8%) and 407 (22.8%) were frail, pre-frail and robust, respectively, at 5 months compared with 123 (6.9%), 1046 (58.6%) and 616 (34.5%) at 1 year. Factors associated with pre-frailty or frailty were invasive mechanical ventilation, older age, female sex, and greater social deprivation. Frail participants had a larger reduction in HRQoL compared with before their COVID-19 illness and were less likely to describe themselves as recovered. Interpretation: Physical frailty and pre-frailty are common following hospitalisation with COVID-19. Improvement in frailty was seen between 5 and 12 months although two-thirds of the population remained pre-frail or frail. This suggests comprehensive assessment and interventions targeting pre-frailty and frailty beyond the initial illness are required. Funding: UK Research and Innovation and National Institute for Health Research.The study was funded with grants from UK Research and Innovation (MR/V027859/1) and The National Institute of Health Research (COV0319). This study would not be possible without all the participants who have given their time and support. We thank all the participants and their families. We thank the many research administrators, health-care and social-care professionals who contributed to setting up and delivering the study at all of the 40 NHS trusts and 25 research institutions across the UK, as well as all the supporting staff at the NIHR Clinical Research Network, Health Research Authority, Research Ethics Committee, Department of Health and Social Care, Public Health Scotland, and Public Health England, and support from the ISARIC Coronavirus Clinical Characterisation Consortium. The authors would also like to acknowledge the support of the eDRIS Team (Public Health Scotland) for their involvement in obtaining approvals, provisioning and linking data and the use of the secure analytical platform within the National Safe Haven

Clinical characteristics with inflammation profiling of long COVID and association with 1-year recovery following hospitalisation in the UK: a prospective observational study

Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Background: No effective pharmacological or non-pharmacological interventions exist for patients with long COVID. We aimed to describe recovery 1 year after hospital discharge for COVID-19, identify factors associated with patient-perceived recovery, and identify potential therapeutic targets by describing the underlying inflammatory profiles of the previously described recovery clusters at 5 months after hospital discharge. Methods: The Post-hospitalisation COVID-19 study (PHOSP-COVID) is a prospective, longitudinal cohort study recruiting adults (aged ≥18 years) discharged from hospital with COVID-19 across the UK. Recovery was assessed using patient-reported outcome measures, physical performance, and organ function at 5 months and 1 year after hospital discharge, and stratified by both patient-perceived recovery and recovery cluster. Hierarchical logistic regression modelling was performed for patient-perceived recovery at 1 year. Cluster analysis was done using the clustering large applications k-medoids approach using clinical outcomes at 5 months. Inflammatory protein profiling was analysed from plasma at the 5-month visit. This study is registered on the ISRCTN Registry, ISRCTN10980107, and recruitment is ongoing. Findings: 2320 participants discharged from hospital between March 7, 2020, and April 18, 2021, were assessed at 5 months after discharge and 807 (32·7%) participants completed both the 5-month and 1-year visits. 279 (35·6%) of these 807 patients were women and 505 (64·4%) were men, with a mean age of 58·7 (SD 12·5) years, and 224 (27·8%) had received invasive mechanical ventilation (WHO class 7–9). The proportion of patients reporting full recovery was unchanged between 5 months (501 [25·5%] of 1965) and 1 year (232 [28·9%] of 804). Factors associated with being less likely to report full recovery at 1 year were female sex (odds ratio 0·68 [95% CI 0·46–0·99]), obesity (0·50 [0·34–0·74]) and invasive mechanical ventilation (0·42 [0·23–0·76]). Cluster analysis (n=1636) corroborated the previously reported four clusters: very severe, severe, moderate with cognitive impairment, and mild, relating to the severity of physical health, mental health, and cognitive impairment at 5 months. We found increased inflammatory mediators of tissue damage and repair in both the very severe and the moderate with cognitive impairment clusters compared with the mild cluster, including IL-6 concentration, which was increased in both comparisons (n=626 participants). We found a substantial deficit in median EQ-5D-5L utility index from before COVID-19 (retrospective assessment; 0·88 [IQR 0·74–1·00]), at 5 months (0·74 [0·64–0·88]) to 1 year (0·75 [0·62–0·88]), with minimal improvements across all outcome measures at 1 year after discharge in the whole cohort and within each of the four clusters. Interpretation: The sequelae of a hospital admission with COVID-19 were substantial 1 year after discharge across a range of health domains, with the minority in our cohort feeling fully recovered. Patient-perceived health-related quality of life was reduced at 1 year compared with before hospital admission. Systematic inflammation and obesity are potential treatable traits that warrant further investigation in clinical trials. Funding: UK Research and Innovation and National Institute for Health Research.UK Research and Innovation and National Institute for Health Researc