Aline Almeida Gulart1, Cintia Laura Pereira de Araujo2, Anelise Bauer Munari1, Karoliny Dos Santos3, Manuela Karloh4, Betina Gabriele Foscarini5, Pedro Dal Lago2, Anamaria Fleig Mayer6. 1. Center for Assistance, Teaching and Research in Pulmonary Rehabilitation (NuReab), Universidade do Estado de Santa Catarina (UDESC), Florianópolis, SC, Brazil; Human Movement Sciences Graduate Program, Centro de Ciências da Saúde e do Esporte (CEFID), Universidade do Estado de Santa Catarina (UDESC), Florianópolis, SC, Brazil. 2. Research Group on Cardiopulmonary Interaction (GPIC), Universidade Federal de Ciências da Saúde de Porto Alegre (UFCSPA), Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil; Health Sciences Graduate Program, Universidade Federal de Ciências da Saúde de Porto Alegre (UFCSPA), Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil. 3. Center for Assistance, Teaching and Research in Pulmonary Rehabilitation (NuReab), Universidade do Estado de Santa Catarina (UDESC), Florianópolis, SC, Brazil. 4. Center for Assistance, Teaching and Research in Pulmonary Rehabilitation (NuReab), Universidade do Estado de Santa Catarina (UDESC), Florianópolis, SC, Brazil; Physical Therapy Graduate Program, Centro de Ciências da Saúde e do Esporte (CEFID), Universidade do Estado de Santa Catarina (UDESC), Florianópolis, SC, Brazil. 5. Research Group on Cardiopulmonary Interaction (GPIC), Universidade Federal de Ciências da Saúde de Porto Alegre (UFCSPA), Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil. 6. Center for Assistance, Teaching and Research in Pulmonary Rehabilitation (NuReab), Universidade do Estado de Santa Catarina (UDESC), Florianópolis, SC, Brazil; Human Movement Sciences Graduate Program, Centro de Ciências da Saúde e do Esporte (CEFID), Universidade do Estado de Santa Catarina (UDESC), Florianópolis, SC, Brazil; Physical Therapy Graduate Program, Centro de Ciências da Saúde e do Esporte (CEFID), Universidade do Estado de Santa Catarina (UDESC), Florianópolis, SC, Brazil. Electronic address: anamaria.mayer@udesc.br.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine Glittre-ADL test minimal important difference in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. METHODS: This is quasi-experimental study. Sixty patients with moderate to very severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (age 64.1, SD=9.09 years; forced expiratory volume in the first second 37.9, SD=13.0% predicted participated in a pulmonary rehabilitation program based on physical training, conducted over 24 sessions supervised, three times a week, including aerobic training in treadmill and resistance training for upper limbs and lower limbs. The main outcomes were the Glittre-ADL test and six-minute walk test, before and after 24 sessions of pulmonary rehabilitation. The minimal important difference was established using the distribution and anchor-based methods. RESULTS: Patients improved their functional capacity after the pulmonary rehabilitation. The effect sizes of Glittre-ADL test and six-minute walk test improvement were similar (0.45 vs 0.44, respectively). The established minimal important differences ranged from -0.38 to -1.05. The reduction of 0.38min (23s) corresponded to a sensitivity of 64% and a specificity of 69% with an area under the curve of 0.66 (95%CI 0.51-0.81; p=0.04). Subjects who achieved the minimal important difference of -0.38min for the Glittre-ADL test had a superior improvement of approximately 42m in the six-minute walk test when compared to patients who did not. CONCLUSIONS: The present findings suggest -0.38min as the minimal important difference in the time spent in the Glittre-ADL test after 24 sessions of pulmonary rehabilitation in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03251781 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03251781).
OBJECTIVE: To determine Glittre-ADL test minimal important difference in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. METHODS: This is quasi-experimental study. Sixty patients with moderate to very severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (age 64.1, SD=9.09 years; forced expiratory volume in the first second 37.9, SD=13.0% predicted participated in a pulmonary rehabilitation program based on physical training, conducted over 24 sessions supervised, three times a week, including aerobic training in treadmill and resistance training for upper limbs and lower limbs. The main outcomes were the Glittre-ADL test and six-minute walk test, before and after 24 sessions of pulmonary rehabilitation. The minimal important difference was established using the distribution and anchor-based methods. RESULTS:Patients improved their functional capacity after the pulmonary rehabilitation. The effect sizes of Glittre-ADL test and six-minute walk test improvement were similar (0.45 vs 0.44, respectively). The established minimal important differences ranged from -0.38 to -1.05. The reduction of 0.38min (23s) corresponded to a sensitivity of 64% and a specificity of 69% with an area under the curve of 0.66 (95%CI 0.51-0.81; p=0.04). Subjects who achieved the minimal important difference of -0.38min for the Glittre-ADL test had a superior improvement of approximately 42m in the six-minute walk test when compared to patients who did not. CONCLUSIONS: The present findings suggest -0.38min as the minimal important difference in the time spent in the Glittre-ADL test after 24 sessions of pulmonary rehabilitation in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03251781 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03251781).
Authors: Anne E Holland; Martijn A Spruit; Thierry Troosters; Milo A Puhan; Véronique Pepin; Didier Saey; Meredith C McCormack; Brian W Carlin; Frank C Sciurba; Fabio Pitta; Jack Wanger; Neil MacIntyre; David A Kaminsky; Bruce H Culver; Susan M Revill; Nidia A Hernandes; Vasileios Andrianopoulos; Carlos Augusto Camillo; Katy E Mitchell; Annemarie L Lee; Catherine J Hill; Sally J Singh Journal: Eur Respir J Date: 2014-10-30 Impact factor: 16.671
Authors: Manuela Karloh; Marlus Karsten; Fernanda V Pissaia; Cintia L P de Araujo; Anamaria F Mayer Journal: J Rehabil Med Date: 2014-01 Impact factor: 2.912