The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Feasibility of an online platform delivery of pulmonary rehabilitation for individuals with chronic respiratory disease

Feasibility of an online platform delivery of pulmonary rehabilitation for individuals with chronic respiratory disease
Feasibility of an online platform delivery of pulmonary rehabilitation for individuals with chronic respiratory disease
Introduction: SARS-CoV-2 has restricted access to face-to-face delivery of pulmonary rehabilitation (PR). Evidence suggests that telehealth-PR is non-inferior to outpatient PR. However, it is unknown whether patients who have been referred to face-to-face programmes can feasibly complete an online-PR programme.

Methods: this service evaluation used a mixed-methods approach to investigate a rapid PR service remodelling using the University of Gloucestershire eLearn Moodle platform. Quantitative baseline demographic and PR outcome data were collected from online-PR participants, and semistructured interviews were completed with PR staff and participants.

Results: twenty-five individuals were eligible from a PR waiting list. Thirteen declined participation and 14 completed PR. Significant pre-post online PR improvements were achieved in 1 min sit-to-stand (CI 2.1 to 9 (p=0.004)), Generalised Anxiety Disorder (CI −0.3 to −2.6 (p=0.023)), Primary Health Questionnaire-9 (CI −0.3 to −5.1 (p=0.029)), Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire dyspnoea (CI 0.5 to 1.3 (p=0.001)), fatigue (CI 0.7 to 2 (p=0.0004)), emotion (CI 0.7 to 1.7 (p=0.0002)), mastery (CI 0.4 to 1.3 (p=0.001)). Interviews indicated that patient PR inclusion was made possible with digital support and a PR introduction session improved participant engagement and safety. Incremental progression of exercise was perceived as more successful online compared with face-to-face PR. However, perceptions were that education sessions were less successful. Online-PR required significant staff time resource.

Discussion: online-PR improves patient outcomes and is feasible and acceptable for individuals referred for face-to-face PR in the context of a requirement for social distancing. Face-to-face programmes can be adapted in a rapid fashion with both staff and participants perceiving benefit. Future pragmatic trials are now warranted comparing online-PR including remote assessments to centre-based PR with suitably matched outcomes, and patient and staff perceptions sought regarding barriers and facilitators of online delivery.
2052-4439
Lewis, Adam
71c83b66-d847-4aee-b716-b04d6de51450
Knight, Ellena
34079b91-45b0-49f4-982e-98d0180105d2
Bland, Matthew
92ff6b1c-2be6-463d-8a41-3831cca911d7
Middleton, Jack
2cee96f9-b42f-4be3-ac4f-80be04cb33f3
Mitchell, Esther
c91df06a-69ba-4575-8c4e-b87a9edb344b
McCrum, Kate
db6f5bc3-d7f5-4f87-823f-fb647c5ee5eb
Conway, Joy
bbe9a2e4-fb85-4d4a-a38c-0c1832c32d06
Bevan-Smith, Elaine
c0986364-5c13-4b7b-ac27-4db3bf0549a5
Lewis, Adam
71c83b66-d847-4aee-b716-b04d6de51450
Knight, Ellena
34079b91-45b0-49f4-982e-98d0180105d2
Bland, Matthew
92ff6b1c-2be6-463d-8a41-3831cca911d7
Middleton, Jack
2cee96f9-b42f-4be3-ac4f-80be04cb33f3
Mitchell, Esther
c91df06a-69ba-4575-8c4e-b87a9edb344b
McCrum, Kate
db6f5bc3-d7f5-4f87-823f-fb647c5ee5eb
Conway, Joy
bbe9a2e4-fb85-4d4a-a38c-0c1832c32d06
Bevan-Smith, Elaine
c0986364-5c13-4b7b-ac27-4db3bf0549a5

Lewis, Adam, Knight, Ellena, Bland, Matthew, Middleton, Jack, Mitchell, Esther, McCrum, Kate, Conway, Joy and Bevan-Smith, Elaine (2021) Feasibility of an online platform delivery of pulmonary rehabilitation for individuals with chronic respiratory disease. BMJ Open Respiratory Research, 8, [e000880]. (doi:10.1136/bmjresp-2021-000880).

Record type: Article

Abstract

Introduction: SARS-CoV-2 has restricted access to face-to-face delivery of pulmonary rehabilitation (PR). Evidence suggests that telehealth-PR is non-inferior to outpatient PR. However, it is unknown whether patients who have been referred to face-to-face programmes can feasibly complete an online-PR programme.

Methods: this service evaluation used a mixed-methods approach to investigate a rapid PR service remodelling using the University of Gloucestershire eLearn Moodle platform. Quantitative baseline demographic and PR outcome data were collected from online-PR participants, and semistructured interviews were completed with PR staff and participants.

Results: twenty-five individuals were eligible from a PR waiting list. Thirteen declined participation and 14 completed PR. Significant pre-post online PR improvements were achieved in 1 min sit-to-stand (CI 2.1 to 9 (p=0.004)), Generalised Anxiety Disorder (CI −0.3 to −2.6 (p=0.023)), Primary Health Questionnaire-9 (CI −0.3 to −5.1 (p=0.029)), Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire dyspnoea (CI 0.5 to 1.3 (p=0.001)), fatigue (CI 0.7 to 2 (p=0.0004)), emotion (CI 0.7 to 1.7 (p=0.0002)), mastery (CI 0.4 to 1.3 (p=0.001)). Interviews indicated that patient PR inclusion was made possible with digital support and a PR introduction session improved participant engagement and safety. Incremental progression of exercise was perceived as more successful online compared with face-to-face PR. However, perceptions were that education sessions were less successful. Online-PR required significant staff time resource.

Discussion: online-PR improves patient outcomes and is feasible and acceptable for individuals referred for face-to-face PR in the context of a requirement for social distancing. Face-to-face programmes can be adapted in a rapid fashion with both staff and participants perceiving benefit. Future pragmatic trials are now warranted comparing online-PR including remote assessments to centre-based PR with suitably matched outcomes, and patient and staff perceptions sought regarding barriers and facilitators of online delivery.

Text
e000880.full - Version of Record
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.
Download (383kB)

More information

Accepted/In Press date: 20 February 2021
e-pub ahead of print date: 24 March 2021

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 488821
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/488821
ISSN: 2052-4439
PURE UUID: 8c5a79f9-fde0-4a7d-925b-d2bf33d68fea
ORCID for Adam Lewis: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0002-0576-8823
ORCID for Joy Conway: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0001-6464-1526

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 05 Apr 2024 16:45
Last modified: 10 Apr 2024 02:14

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: Adam Lewis ORCID iD
Author: Ellena Knight
Author: Matthew Bland
Author: Jack Middleton
Author: Esther Mitchell
Author: Kate McCrum
Author: Joy Conway ORCID iD
Author: Elaine Bevan-Smith

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×