Arm strength training improves activities of daily living and occupational performance in patients with COPD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Arm strength training may improve functional performance for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This trial investigated the effects of arm strength training on arm exercise capacity, activities of daily living (ADL) and occupational performance in patients with COPD. METHODS: These was a randomized controlled trial in an outpatient clinic. Forty-two stable patients with COPD were randomly assigned into treatment and control groups. The treatment group underwent an 8-week (23 sessions) arm strength training programme. Both groups completed daily breathing exercises at home. Tests included hand grip strength, arm ergometer test, the Glittre-ADL and ADL Simulation tests and measures included the Milliken ADL Scale (MAS) and the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM). RESULTS: Statistically significant increases were detected in hand grip strength and %hand grip strength values, peak arm ergometer workload and the number of ADL simulation test cycles for the treatment group (P < 0.05). Significant decreases were also found in dyspnea and arm fatigue perception during arm ergometer test, and heart rate and dyspnea perception during Glittre-ADL test in the treatment group (P < 0.05). The treatment group also showed significant increases in MAS-house cleaning and laundry and MAS-other activities integrated scores and COPM-performance and satisfaction scores (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Arm strength training increases peripheral muscle strength, arm exercise capacity, ADL performance and patients' ADL performance satisfaction. Training decreases dyspnea and arm fatigue perception during supported arm exercises, and dyspnea perception during ADL. Arm strength training is a reliable and feasible treatment for COPD patients.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".