PR programmes are able to improve exercise capacity (EC), quality of life (QOL) and dispnoea (D) in stable COPD subjects. The efficacy of PR in subjects with RF is not fully clarified. The aim of our study was to evaluate the benefit of PR in subjects with NRF. Forty subjects were divided in two groups: 15 with FEV1> 40% (10M, age range 73 ± 4.69 yrs, Group A) and 25 with FEV1 < 40% (18 M, age range 69 ± 6.9 yrs, Group B). A four weeks of a PR programme carried out in an inpatient setting, included respiratory muscle stretch, exercise training, mucus evacuation techniques, and relaxation techniques. Medical Research Council Dispnoea scale (MRC), Maximal Inspiratory Pressure (MIP) Maximal Expiratory Pressure (MEP), St George Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), and 6-Minutes Walking Distance (6-MWD, mt), were assessed on admission and discharge from IPR. In the Group A all outcomes significantly improved after PR. Results of Group B (pre and post PR) are shown as following: MRC (pre 4.24 ± 0.72; post 3.16 ± 0.99, p <0.001). MIP (pre 61 ± 23; post 83 ± 36, p < 0.001). MEP (pre 124 ± 37; post 153 ± 39, p < 0.001). SGRQ (pre 66 ± 14; post 62 ± 14, n.s.). 6-MWD (269 ± 108; post 310 ± 101, p < 0.05). Our study has shown that an inpatient PR is able to improve EC, D, respiratory muscle strength in all subjects with normocapnic chronic respiratory failure and QOL only in those with FEV1.> 40%. Future studies are needed in subjects with more severe bronchial obstruction and with hypercapnic respiratory failure.
Effect of pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) in subjects with normocapnic respiratory failure (NRF)
VATRELLA, Alessandro;
2003-01-01
Abstract
PR programmes are able to improve exercise capacity (EC), quality of life (QOL) and dispnoea (D) in stable COPD subjects. The efficacy of PR in subjects with RF is not fully clarified. The aim of our study was to evaluate the benefit of PR in subjects with NRF. Forty subjects were divided in two groups: 15 with FEV1> 40% (10M, age range 73 ± 4.69 yrs, Group A) and 25 with FEV1 < 40% (18 M, age range 69 ± 6.9 yrs, Group B). A four weeks of a PR programme carried out in an inpatient setting, included respiratory muscle stretch, exercise training, mucus evacuation techniques, and relaxation techniques. Medical Research Council Dispnoea scale (MRC), Maximal Inspiratory Pressure (MIP) Maximal Expiratory Pressure (MEP), St George Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), and 6-Minutes Walking Distance (6-MWD, mt), were assessed on admission and discharge from IPR. In the Group A all outcomes significantly improved after PR. Results of Group B (pre and post PR) are shown as following: MRC (pre 4.24 ± 0.72; post 3.16 ± 0.99, p <0.001). MIP (pre 61 ± 23; post 83 ± 36, p < 0.001). MEP (pre 124 ± 37; post 153 ± 39, p < 0.001). SGRQ (pre 66 ± 14; post 62 ± 14, n.s.). 6-MWD (269 ± 108; post 310 ± 101, p < 0.05). Our study has shown that an inpatient PR is able to improve EC, D, respiratory muscle strength in all subjects with normocapnic chronic respiratory failure and QOL only in those with FEV1.> 40%. Future studies are needed in subjects with more severe bronchial obstruction and with hypercapnic respiratory failure.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
