Carolyn L Rochester1,2, Sally J Singh3,4. 1. Section of Pulmonary, Critical Care, and Sleep MedicineYale University School of MedicineNew Haven, Connecticut. 2. Department of Internal MedicineVA Connecticut Healthcare SystemWest Haven, Connecticut. 3. Department of Respiratory ScienceUniversity of LeicesterLeicester, United Kingdomand. 4. NIHR Leicester Biomedical Research Centre-Respiratory, Glenfield HospitalUniversity Hospitals of Leicester NHS TrustLeicester, United Kingdom.
Acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
(COPD) worsen the symptoms, airflow obstruction, functional disability, and quality of
life, and increase mortality risk for those with the disease (1), particularly among those requiring hospitalization. Recovery
from COPD exacerbations is often slow; symptoms may take months to resolve and hospital
readmissions are common (1, 2). Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) is an essential
component of the integrated care of individuals with COPD and other chronic respiratory
diseases (3) and is effective in fostering
patients’ recovery after hospitalization for COPD exacerbation (4, 5).
When delivered within 4 weeks of exacerbation, it improves exercise capacity, symptoms,
and quality of life and reduces hospital readmission risk (4); it is recommended in disease management guidelines (1, 6).
Studies have also shown a survival advantage related to postexacerbation PR (4, 7).
However, few patients are referred to PR after hospitalization for COPD exacerbation
(8, 9). Moreover, when offered, patients’ uptake of PR is low (10, 11).In this issue of the Journal, Barker and colleagues (pp. 1517–1524) report the findings of a randomized controlled trial
evaluating the effects of a novel video intervention on PR uptake after hospitalization
for COPD (12). There was no difference in PR
uptake rates between the control and intervention groups. There were also no
between-group differences in time to uptake of PR, referral, completion or adherence
rates, mortality or all-cause readmission rates, or clinical outcomes.This trial had several strengths. It was a well-designed randomized controlled
outcome-blinded trial in which the intervention and control groups were balanced
regarding age, sex, lung function, frailty, naivety to PR, and availability of transport
to a rehabilitation program. Importantly, the investigators used an experience-based
codesigned model in which patients with past experience with hospitalization for COPD
and PR participated in the design of the intervention. Provision of a video to impart
information about PR guarantees that the patient hears the information at least once;
whereas, when given an informational leaflet, there is no guarantee that patients will
actually read it.The trial by Barker and colleagues (12) has some
limitations. First, as recognized by the authors, overall uptake of PR was higher than
previously reported, which may have reduced the ability to detect an intervention
signal. Second, the video provided in the trial did not focus on behavior change, an
essential component of fostering health-enhancing behaviors such as engaging in PR.
Third, although the intervention targeted the contribution of poor patient awareness to
low uptake of postexacerbation PR, there are many additional barriers to program uptake
(13). It is, therefore, not surprising that
a unifaceted one-size-fits-all approach was unsuccessful. The PR community has adopted a
model of “opt in” for posthospitalization rehabilitation, unlike our
colleagues delivering cardiac rehabilitation in which the model is one of “opt
out,” arguably changing the clinicians’ dialogue and patient expectations.
Finally, the optimal timing for delivery of postexacerbation PR is not certain.
Cognitive function is frequently impaired postexacerbation (14); this may be a suboptimal time to discuss a complex
intervention! In addition, an in-hospital and posthospital rehabilitation trial (15) showed significant spontaneous recovery in
the control group, hinting that rehabilitation could be postponed beyond four weeks.
This is supported in part by a qualitative study (16) using semistructured interviews of healthcare professionals and patients
with COPD who had previously been hospitalized that revealed conflicting views regarding
the optimal timing and structure of PR, and highlighted several medical, psychological,
and logistic barriers to its uptake.What solutions might there be to this problem? Opportunities to enhance PR uptake at the
time of an exacerbation may include educational programs for clinicians, pop-up
reminders in electronic medical records, pamphlets regarding PR in clinicians’
offices as a prompt for clinicians, and patient-facing posters on the wards. The
above-noted strategies, as well as provision of lists of local or regional PR programs;
clarification, simplification, or automation of the referral process; and focus on
care-quality metrics can help to foster healthcare professionals’ referrals of
patients to PR (17).In addition to enhancing referrals, increasing uptake remains a priority that may require
a different approach altogether. Such an approach would require obtaining significant
input from patients regarding barriers to uptake and participation, not only
retrospectively but also regarding motivations and priorities at the actual time of COPD
exacerbation and hospitalization. Patients recovering from COPD exacerbation have
numerous diverse and, at times, conflicting issues to deal with. To foster participation
in PR, it is likely essential to understand patients’ treatment priorities,
expectations, and goals vis-à-vis their recovery. What, specifically and stepwise,
do they feel they need?Discussions between healthcare professionals and patients regarding a planned approach to
recovery in the event of hospitalization (including advanced planning for participation
in PR) during a period when patients are well and not acutely stressed or ill may help
to establish patients’ expectations regarding the role of PR in their care after
exacerbation. This would clarify the benefits of and enable people to learn more about
PR, ask questions, express fears or concerns, and consider and plan for participation
should a hospitalization occur. Avoidance of the decision-making during the time of
acute illness and stress may in turn foster program uptake.Likewise, a stepwise collaborative approach, using shared goal setting between patients,
their families and other caregivers, healthcare providers, and home-care service
providers at or around the time of hospital discharge, may help patients to prepare for
and enroll in PR. Initiation of individualized rehabilitation in the home, in
collaboration with providers of center-based PR programs, may help patients recover to
where they feel confidence to progress to the outpatient program setting. Given the wide
circumstances faced by patients, and differences in styles, preferences, beliefs,
adaptations, and coping skills of individuals, no single type of intervention is likely
to increase the uptake of PR among all.The optimal solutions to increase uptake of PR, especially in the postexacerbation
period, remain to be discovered. Although the video intervention in the trial by Barker
and colleagues (12) did not lead to a
significant change in PR uptake in the month after discharge, this should not discourage
but, rather, should encourage ongoing research in this important area. The barriers and
enablers of uptake and participation should be explored further, and future research
should continue to include input from both patients and healthcare professionals.
Different types of interventions may be needed across different patient groups,
countries, health systems, and cultures. Culture change is needed away from the current
prescriptive approach in which healthcare professionals recommend treatments, often
without having considered or assessed patients’ priorities. Discovery and
implementation of strategies to increase uptake of PR, including after COPD
exacerbation, is a worthy and important goal. We should rise to the challenge.
Authors: Gavin C Donaldson; Martin Law; Beverly Kowlessar; Richa Singh; Simon E Brill; James P Allinson; Jadwiga A Wedzicha Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2015-10-15 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Kerry A Spitzer; Mihaela S Stefan; Aruna Priya; Quinn R Pack; Penelope S Pekow; Tara Lagu; Victor M Pinto-Plata; Richard L ZuWallack; Peter K Lindenauer Journal: Ann Am Thorac Soc Date: 2019-01
Authors: Tania Janaudis-Ferreira; Catherine M Tansey; Samantha L Harrison; Cecile Elisabeth Beaurepaire; Donna Goodridge; Jean Bourbeau; Marcel Baltzan Journal: Ann Am Thorac Soc Date: 2019-09
Authors: Christopher Vercammen-Grandjean; David W Schopfer; Ning Zhang; Mary A Whooley Journal: J Cardiopulm Rehabil Prev Date: 2018-11 Impact factor: 2.081
Authors: Martijn A Spruit; Sally J Singh; Chris Garvey; Richard ZuWallack; Linda Nici; Carolyn Rochester; Kylie Hill; Anne E Holland; Suzanne C Lareau; William D-C Man; Fabio Pitta; Louise Sewell; Jonathan Raskin; Jean Bourbeau; Rebecca Crouch; Frits M E Franssen; Richard Casaburi; Jan H Vercoulen; Ioannis Vogiatzis; Rik Gosselink; Enrico M Clini; Tanja W Effing; François Maltais; Job van der Palen; Thierry Troosters; Daisy J A Janssen; Eileen Collins; Judith Garcia-Aymerich; Dina Brooks; Bonnie F Fahy; Milo A Puhan; Martine Hoogendoorn; Rachel Garrod; Annemie M W J Schols; Brian Carlin; Roberto Benzo; Paula Meek; Mike Morgan; Maureen P M H Rutten-van Mölken; Andrew L Ries; Barry Make; Roger S Goldstein; Claire A Dowson; Jan L Brozek; Claudio F Donner; Emiel F M Wouters Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2013-10-15 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Peter K Lindenauer; Mihaela S Stefan; Penelope S Pekow; Kathleen M Mazor; Aruna Priya; Kerry A Spitzer; Tara C Lagu; Quinn R Pack; Victor M Pinto-Plata; Richard ZuWallack Journal: JAMA Date: 2020-05-12 Impact factor: 157.335
Authors: Ruth E Barker; Sarah E Jones; Winston Banya; Sharon Fleming; Samantha S C Kon; Stuart F Clarke; Claire M Nolan; Suhani Patel; Jessica A Walsh; Matthew Maddocks; Morag Farquhar; Derek Bell; Jadwiga A Wedzicha; William D-C Man Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2020-06-15 Impact factor: 21.405