RESUMO
Background: Adherence to treatment is critical when dealing with chronic diseases. One of the difficulties in maintain long-term adherence is the distance from home to rehabilitation center. Objective: To determine the influence of the distance from subjects' residence to rehabilitation center on adherence of a 12-week pulmonary rehabilitation program in chronic respiratory disease. Methods: This retrospective study analyzed patients' medical records with chronic respiratory diseases from a pulmonary rehabilitation center. Driving distance between patients' home and rehabilitation center was calculated with Google maps. The home-rehabilitation center distances were classified in three levels: up to 10, 10-30 and more than 30 km. Results: 280 medical records from patients with chronic pulmonary diseases with medical indication to follow the pulmonary rehabilitation program were found and 148 medical records were included in our study. Out of them, the majority (n = 93) had chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Seventy percent of patients lived up to 10 km, 24% lived between 10 and 30 km and 6% lived more than 30 km. No difference in adherence was found comparing the three groups based on the distance from home to rehabilitation center. Conclusion: In this study, distance between home and rehabilitation center did not influence adherence to pulmonary rehabilitation program. (AU)
Assuntos
Centros de Reabilitação , Terapêutica , Características de Residência , Prontuários Médicos , Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva CrônicaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The perception of dyspnea is a subjective feeling typically self-assessed by the patient. However, the assessment by a caregiver is sometimes required. OBJECTIVES: The primary aim was to compare patient self-assessment and caregiver assessment of dyspnea (interrater reliability) using the modified Borg and visual analog scale (VAS) in hospitalized patients. The secondary aim was to compare dyspnea assessment between the two scales for patients and caregiver (inter-instrument reliability). METHODS: Self-assessment of dyspnea intensity of hospitalized patients with respiratory diseases was compared with caregiver's assessment. Dyspnea intensity was measured using two scales, the modified Borg scale (0-10 scale) and the 10 cm VAS. Mean difference and 95% confidence interval (CI) between assessors (i.e. patient versus caregiver) were calculated for each scale. Inter- and intra-rater reliability was calculated using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). RESULTS: A total of 254 patients were recruited. The mean differences between patient and caregiver ratings were 0.31 (95% CI: 0.09, 0.53) for the modified Borg scale and 0.36 (95% CI: 0.06, 0.65) for the VAS scale. Interrater reliability was good for both scales with ICC of 0.79 (95% CI: 0.73, 0.84) for VAS and 0.82 (95% CI: 0.77, 0.86) for the modified Borg scale. The mean differences in scores between scales were 0.93 (95% CI 0.69, 1.17) for patients' ratings and 0.88 (95% CI 0.72, 1.04) for caregiver's rating. The inter-instrument reliability was moderate to good and similar for both assessors. CONCLUSION: Dyspnea can be accurately estimated by caregivers when patients with lung diseases cannot self-report. Scores on the VAS to rate dyspnea were higher than the scores on the Borg scale.
Assuntos
Cuidadores , Dispneia , Humanos , Reprodutibilidade dos TestesRESUMO
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate learning and encouragement effects on the 6-minute walk test in children between 6 and 12 years of age. STUDY DESIGN: Two 6-minute walk tests separated by a 10-minute resting period were performed by healthy children between 6 and 12 years of age to evaluate the learning (part 1) and encouragement effects (part 2; randomization with and without encouragement). Distance and cardiorespiratory variables were used as outcomes. RESULTS: 148 children were recruited. The intraclass correlation coefficient estimates were 0.927 (95% CI, 0.893-0.951; part 1) and 0.844 (95% CI, 0.744-0.907; part 2). The test-retest agreement was verified for distance (P = .679) with a bias of 1.1 m (95% CI, -4 to 6), but the increase in distance with encouragement was significantly and clinically relevant (P < .001; +41 m; 95% CI, 33-50). CONCLUSION: No training is required for the 6-minute walk test in children, in contrast with adults, but there was an encouragement effect on the walked distance in these children. Guidelines should take these results into account. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03276299.
Assuntos
Teste de Esforço , Aprendizagem , Motivação , Caminhada/fisiologia , Caminhada/psicologia , Bélgica , Criança , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Valores de Referência , Reprodutibilidade dos TestesRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Positive expiratory pressure (PEP) is regularly used as a self-administered airway clearance technique. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the need to teach the correct use of the PEP device and to measure the progress of the success rate of the maneuver after training. METHOD: A PEP system (PariPEP-S Sytem) was used to generate PEP in 30 healthy volunteers. They were instructed by a qualified physical therapist to breathe correctly through the PEP device. Then they were evaluated during a set of ten expirations. Two other evaluations were performed at day 2 and day 8 (before and after feedback). The mean PEP and the success rate were calculated for each set of expirations. The number of maneuvers needed to obtain a correct use was calculated on the first session. RESULTS: An optimal PEP was reached after 7.5 SD 2.7 attempts by all subjects. Success rates and mean pressures were similar between the different sets of expirations (p=0.720 and p=0.326, respectively). Pressure variability was around 10%. After one week, 30% of subjects generated more than two non-optimal pressures in the set of ten expirations. No difference in success rate was observed depending on the evaluations. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that good initial training on the use of the PEP device and regular follow-up are required for the subject to reach optimal expiratory pressure.
Assuntos
Volume Expiratório Forçado/fisiologia , Respiração com Pressão Positiva/instrumentação , Humanos , Modalidades de Fisioterapia/normas , Respiração com Pressão Positiva/métodos , Pressão , RespiraçãoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Positive expiratory pressure (PEP) is regularly used as a self-administered airway clearance technique. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the need to teach the correct use of the PEP device and to measure the progress of the success rate of the maneuver after training. METHOD: A PEP system (PariPEP-S Sytem) was used to generate PEP in 30 healthy volunteers. They were instructed by a qualified physical therapist to breathe correctly through the PEP device. Then they were evaluated during a set of ten expirations. Two other evaluations were performed at day 2 and day 8 (before and after feedback). The mean PEP and the success rate were calculated for each set of expirations. The number of maneuvers needed to obtain a correct use was calculated on the first session. RESULTS: An optimal PEP was reached after 7.5 SD 2.7 attempts by all subjects. Success rates and mean pressures were similar between the different sets of expirations (p=0.720 and p=0.326, respectively). Pressure variability was around 10%. After one week, 30% of subjects generated more than two non-optimal pressures in the set of ten expirations. No difference in success rate was observed depending on the evaluations. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that good initial training on the use of the PEP device and regular follow-up are required for the subject to reach optimal expiratory pressure.
Assuntos
Humanos , Volume Expiratório Forçado/fisiologia , Respiração com Pressão Positiva/instrumentação , Pressão , Respiração , Respiração com Pressão Positiva/métodos , Modalidades de Fisioterapia/normasRESUMO
Home mechanical ventilation requires equipment, consisting of a generator of pressure, a tubing and an interface to deliver air to the patient. Instructions for equipment maintenance are generally not based on scientific evidence. Studies however have reported that tubing and masks used at home are the most commonly found as very dirty and contaminated. Dirtiness and contamination of equipment potentially expose patients to a higher risk of airway colonization, which, in turn, should cause respiratory infections. For this reason, published hygiene instructions include the use of disinfectant solution. Nevertheless, they generally fail to explain how basic maintenance may be achieved by simple cleaning with soap and water. The instructions for post-cleaning disinfection will depend upon the relative sensitivity of patients to respiratory tract infections and the related risks for bacterial colonization of the airways. Restrictive and obstructive disease patients are not equally sensitive to infections and, as a consequence, should not require similarly elaborate disinfection level. According with the restrictive or obstructive origin of respiratory insufficiency, the current educational review suggests simple and adequate rules for hygiene of tubing and masks in the home setting. Written instructions on how to clean the equipment for home ventilation are useful and sufficient in restrictive patients. In obstructive patients, cleaning always precedes disinfection. After cleaning, rinsing and drying are important. An effective weekly 20-minute disinfection may be achieved by using an hypochlorite solution of soaking in a concentration of 0.5%.
Assuntos
Desinfecção/métodos , Contaminação de Equipamentos/prevenção & controle , Ventiladores Mecânicos/microbiologia , Desinfecção/normas , Serviços de Assistência Domiciliar , Humanos , Higiene/normas , Pneumopatias Obstrutivas/terapia , Respiração Artificial/instrumentaçãoRESUMO
Home mechanical ventilation requires equipment, consisting of a generator of pressure, a tubing and an interface to deliver air to the patient. Instructions for equipment maintenance are generally not based on scientific evidence. Studies however have reported that tubing and masks used at home are the most commonly found as very dirty and contaminated. Dirtiness and contamination of equipment potentially expose patients to a higher risk of airway colonization, which, in turn, should cause respiratory infections. For this reason, published hygiene instructions include the use of disinfectant solution. Nevertheless, they generally fail to explain how basic maintenance may be achieved by simple cleaning with soap and water. The instructions for post-cleaning disinfection will depend upon the relative sensitivity of patients to respiratory tract infections and the related risks for bacterial colonization of the airways. Restrictive and obstructive disease patients are not equally sensitive to infections and, as a consequence, should not require similarly elaborate disinfection level. According with the restrictive or obstructive origin of respiratory insufficiency, the current educational review suggests simple and adequate rules for hygiene of tubing and masks in the home setting. Written instructions on how to clean the equipment for home ventilation are useful and sufficient in restrictive patients. In obstructive patients, cleaning always precedes disinfection. After cleaning, rinsing and drying are important. An effective weekly 20-minute disinfection may be achieved by using an hypochlorite solution of soaking in a concentration of 0.5 percent.