Stefanie Arce Pardo1, Shuheng Lai2, Luis Ortiz-Muñoz3, Rocío Bravo-Jeria4, Francisca Verdugo-Paiva5, Gabriel Rada6. 1. Dr. Exequiel González Cortés Hospital, Faculty of Medicine, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile. ORCID: 0000-0002-1069-2894. 2. Faculty of Medicine, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile. ORCID: 0000-0002-5419-1303. 3. UC Evidence Center, Cochrane Chile Associated Center, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile; Chilean satellite of The Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC), Santiago, Chile. Address: Diagonal Paraguay 476, Santiago, Chile. Email: leortizmunoz@uc.cl. ORCID: 0000-0001-6449-2153. 4. Departamento de Evaluación de Tecnologías Sanitarias y Salud Basada en Evidencia, División de Planificación Sanitaria, Ministerio de Salud, Santiago, Chile. ORCID: 0000-0002-3744-5578. 5. Epistemonikos Foundation, Santiago, Chile UC Evidence Center, Cochrane Chile Associated Center, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile. ORCID: 0000-0003-0199-9744. 6. Epistemonikos Foundation, Santiago, Chile; UC Evidence Center, Cochrane Chile Associated Center, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile; Internal Medicine Department, Faculty of Medicine, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile. ORCID: 0000-0003-2435-0710.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This living systematic review aims to provide a timely, rigorous and continuously updated summary of the evidence available on the role of pulmonary rehabilitation in the treatment of patients with COVID-19. DESIGN: This is the protocol of a living systematic review. DATA SOURCES: We will conduct searches in the L·OVE (Living OVerview of Evidence) platform for COVID-19, a system that maps PICO questions to a repository maintained through regular searches in electronic databases, preprint servers, trial registries and other resources relevant to COVID-19. No date or language restrictions will be applied. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES AND METHODS: We adapted an already published common protocol for multiple parallel systematic reviews to the specificities of this question. We will include randomized trials evaluating the effect of pulmonary rehabilitation as monotherapy or in combination with other interventions-versus sham or no treatment in patients with COVID-19. Two reviewers will independently screen each study for eligibility, extract data, and assess the risk of bias. We will pool the results using meta-analysis and will apply the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: No ethics approval is considered necessary. The results of this review will be widely disseminated via peer-reviewed publications, social networks and traditional media.
OBJECTIVE: This living systematic review aims to provide a timely, rigorous and continuously updated summary of the evidence available on the role of pulmonary rehabilitation in the treatment of patients with COVID-19. DESIGN: This is the protocol of a living systematic review. DATA SOURCES: We will conduct searches in the L·OVE (Living OVerview of Evidence) platform for COVID-19, a system that maps PICO questions to a repository maintained through regular searches in electronic databases, preprint servers, trial registries and other resources relevant to COVID-19. No date or language restrictions will be applied. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES AND METHODS: We adapted an already published common protocol for multiple parallel systematic reviews to the specificities of this question. We will include randomized trials evaluating the effect of pulmonary rehabilitation as monotherapy or in combination with other interventions-versus sham or no treatment in patients with COVID-19. Two reviewers will independently screen each study for eligibility, extract data, and assess the risk of bias. We will pool the results using meta-analysis and will apply the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: No ethics approval is considered necessary. The results of this review will be widely disseminated via peer-reviewed publications, social networks and traditional media.