The effects of pulmonary rehabilitation in the national emphysema treatment trial.

STUDY OBJECTIVES Pulmonary rehabilitation is an established treatment in patients with chronic lung disease but is not widely utilized. Most trials have been conducted in single centers. The National Emphysema Treatment Trial (NETT) provided an opportunity to evaluate pulmonary rehabilitation in a large cohort of patients who were treated in centers throughout the United States. DESIGN Prospective observational study of cohort prior to randomization in a multicenter clinical trial. SETTING University-based clinical centers and community-based satellite pulmonary rehabilitation programs. PATIENTS AND INTERVENTION A total of 1,218 patients with severe emphysema underwent pulmonary rehabilitation before and after randomization to lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) or continued medical management. Rehabilitation was conducted at 17 NETT centers supplemented by 539 satellite centers. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS Lung function, exercise tolerance, dyspnea, and quality of life were evaluated at regular intervals. Significant (p < 0.001) improvements were observed consistently in exercise (cycle ergometry, 3.1 W; 6-min walk test distance, 76 feet), dyspnea (University of California, San Diego Shortness of Breath Questionnaire score, -3.2; Borg breathlessness score: breathing cycle, -0.8; 6-min walk, -0.5) and quality of life (St. George Respiratory Questionnaire score, -3.5; Quality of Well-Being Scale score, +0.035; Medical Outcomes Study 36-item short form score: physical health summary, +1.3; mental health summary, + 2.0). Patients who had not undergone prior rehabilitation improved more than those who had. In multivariate models, only prior rehabilitation status predicted changes after rehabilitation. In 20% of patients, exercise level changed sufficiently after rehabilitation to alter the NETT subgroup predictive of outcome. Overall, changes after rehabilitation did not predict differential mortality or improvement in exercise (primary outcomes) by treatment group. CONCLUSIONS The NETT experience demonstrates the effectiveness of pulmonary rehabilitation in patients with severe emphysema who were treated in a national cross-section of programs. Pulmonary rehabilitation plays an important role in preparing and selecting patients for surgical interventions such as LVRS.

[1]  A. Ries,et al.  Minimally Clinically Important Difference for the UCSD Shortness of Breath Questionnaire, Borg Scale, and Visual Analog Scale , 2005, COPD.

[2]  Steven Piantadosi,et al.  A randomized trial comparing lung-volume-reduction surgery with medical therapy for severe emphysema. , 2003, The New England journal of medicine.

[3]  Ruth Etzioni,et al.  Cost effectiveness of lung-volume-reduction surgery for patients with severe emphysema. , 2003, The New England journal of medicine.

[4]  P. Jones Interpreting thresholds for a clinically significant change in health status in asthma and COPD , 2002, European Respiratory Journal.

[5]  Steven Piantadosi,et al.  Patients at high risk of death after lung-volume-reduction surgery. , 2001, The New England journal of medicine.

[6]  Steven Piantadosi,et al.  Rationale and design of the national emphysema treatment trial: A prospective randomized trial of lung volume reduction surgery , 1999 .

[7]  Sarah E. Duffy,et al.  Rationale and design of the National Emphysema Treatment Trial (NETT): A prospective randomized trial of lung volume reduction surgery. , 1999, The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery.

[8]  R. Zuwallack,et al.  Functional status in pulmonary rehabilitation participants. , 1999, Journal of cardiopulmonary rehabilitation.

[9]  R. Wagenaar,et al.  The long-term effects of pulmonary rehabilitation in patients with asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a research synthesis. , 1999, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[10]  R. Kaplan,et al.  Validation of a new dyspnea measure: the UCSD Shortness of Breath Questionnaire. University of California, San Diego. , 1998, Chest.

[11]  Alison E. Ries Pulmonary rehabilitation: joint ACCP/AACVPR evidence-based guidelines. ACCP/AACVPR Pulmonary Rehabilitation Guidelines Panel. American College of Chest Physicians. American Association of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Rehabilitation. , 1997, Chest.

[12]  Gordon H Guyatt,et al.  Meta-analysis of respiratory rehabilitation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease , 1996, The Lancet.

[13]  B. Make,et al.  Standards for the diagnosis and care of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. American Thoracic Society. , 1995, American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine.

[14]  R. Casaburi,et al.  Principles and Practice of Pulmonary Rehabilitation , 1993 .

[15]  B. Celli,et al.  Pulmonary Rehabilitation: Guidelines to Success , 1993 .

[16]  G. Connors,et al.  Guidelines for Pulmonary Rehabilitation Programs , 1992 .

[17]  P. Jones,et al.  A self-complete measure of health status for chronic airflow limitation. The St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire. , 1992, The American review of respiratory disease.

[18]  A. Beck,et al.  An inventory for measuring depression. , 1961, Archives of general psychiatry.

[19]  R. Reitan Validity of the Trail Making Test as an Indicator of Organic Brain Damage , 1958 .