In-Home Pulmonary Telerehabilitation for Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Pre-experimental Study on Effectiveness, Satisfaction, and Adherence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) has proven effective in improving exercise tolerance and quality of life in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). In Canada, however, there are insufficient rehabilitation services. New strategies such as telerehabilitation must be deployed to increase accessibility. This study aims to investigate the effect of telerehabilitation on exercise tolerance and quality of life and to document patient satisfaction and adherence. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-six patients with moderate to very severe COPD participated in this pre-/postintervention study. They received 15 in-home teletreatment sessions over 8 weeks via videoconference from a service center to their home. Education was provided via self-learning health capsules. Assessments were carried out twice before (T0 and T1; 8 weeks apart) and immediately after the intervention (T2). Primary outcome measures were changes in exercise tolerance (6-min walk test [6MWT] and cycle endurance test [CET]) and quality of life (Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire [CRQ]). RESULTS: There were significant improvements between pre- and postintervention (T2-T1) on the 6MWT (32 m; p<0.001), CET (41 s; p=0.005), and three of four CRQ domains (dyspnea [p<0.001], fatigue [p=0.002], and emotion [p=0.002]). Improvements in the CET and fatigue during the 8-week intervention period were greater than changes over 8 weeks of maturation (T1-T0) (p=0.004 and 0.02, respectively). Participants' satisfaction and adherence rate with telerehabilitation were very high. CONCLUSIONS: Using telehealth technology to deliver in-home PR is a feasible and practical solution for patients with moderate to very severe COPD. The telerehabilitation program was associated with beneficial effects on exercise tolerance and quality of life and was well received by users.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".