Mobile health pulmonary rehabilitation (m-PR) compared to centre-based pulmonary rehabilitation in people with COPD: a randomised controlled equivalence trial.

Le résumé fourni par la source

Background: Mobile health (mHealth) pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) may help overcome access barriers to PR. Aim: To determine if mHealth PR (m-PR) was equivalent to centre-based PR (CB-PR) in terms of improvements in health status and exercise capacity in people with COPD. Methods: Prospective randomised controlled equivalence trial. Participants were randomised to either eight weeks of m-PR at home with an mHealth app which included all essential components of PR, or CB-PR. Co-primary outcomes were change in health status (COPD assessment test [CAT]) and exercise capacity (six-minute walk distance [6MWD]) with equivalence margins set at ± 2 points and ± 25 m respectively. An intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol analysis were conducted. Results: 90 participants were randomised (mean ± SD: age 75 ± 7 years, FEV1 57 ± 14% predicted), with 38 m-PR and 42 CB-PR participants in the ITT analysis. There was a significant between group difference in CAT score (mean difference [MD] -4.9 points, 95% CI -6.8 to -3.0), with upper and lower limits of the CI exceeding equivalence margins, indicating superiority of m-PR. The odds of reaching the MCID in CAT was 5 times greater for m-PR than compared to CB-PR. There were no between-group differences in 6MWD (MD 13m, 95% CI -3 to 28) or the proportion of participants who reached the MCID for 6MWD. Results were no different from the per-protocol analysis. Conclusion: m-PR resulted in superior improvements in health status and equivalent improvements in exercise capacity in people with COPD when compared to CB-PR. mHealth PR is an option to overcome access barriers to centre-based PR.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.