Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) effectively improves symptoms and exercise ability in patients with stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). However, the effectiveness and timing of early PR on hospitalized patients with acute exacerbation of COPD (AECOPD) is still debated.
This study conducted a meta-analysis to compare the outcome benefits between early PR and usual care for patient hospitalized due to AECOPD. A systematic search was performed for retrieving randomized control trials (RCTs) from the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane library until November 2021. RCTs reporting early PR for AECOPD with hospitalization, either during admission or within four weeks of discharge, were enrolled for systematic review and meta-analysis.
Twenty RCTs (1274 participants) were included. Early PR showed significantly improved readmission rate (ten trials, risk ratio 0.68, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.50-0.92), 6-minute walking distance (6MWD, twelve trials, MD 59.73, 95% CI 36.34-83.12), St George's Respiratory Questionnaire score (eight trials, MD -10.65, 95% CI -14.78 to -6.52), Borg score (eight trials, MD -0.79, 95% CI -1.26 to -0.32), and modified Medical Research Council dyspnea scale (eight trials, MD -0.38, 95% CI -0.5 to -0.25). However, the trend of mortality (six trials, risk ratio 0.72, 95% CI 0.39-1.34) benefit was not significant. The subgroup analysis showed non-significant trends of better effect in early PR during admission than those after discharge for outcomes of 6MWD, quality of life, and dyspnea. However, non-significant trends of less benefits on mortality and readmission rate were found in early PR during the admission.
Overall, early PR is beneficial for AECOPD with hospitalization, and there was no significant outcome difference between PR initiated during admission or within 4 weeks of discharge.

Effects of Early Pulmonary Rehabilitation on Hospitalized Patients with Acute Exacerbation of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) significantly impacts physical, psychological, and social functioning and reduces quality of life, which may persist for at least 6 months. Given the fact that COVID-19 is a highly infectious disease and therefore healthcare facilities may be sources of contagion, new methods avoiding face-to-face contact between healthcare workers and patients are urgently needed. Telerehabilitation is the provision of rehabilitation services to patients at a distance 
We searched the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Medline (
Seven randomized controlled trials with eight comparisons were included and all of them were used for meta-analysis. The meta-analyses of absolute values showed the superiority of telerehabilitation over no treatment or usual care for dyspnea (Borg scale: mean difference = -1.88, -2.37 to -1.39; Multidimensional dyspnea-12: mean difference = -3.70, -5.93 to -1.48), limb muscle strength (mean difference = 3.29; 2.12 to 4.47), ambulation capacity (standardized mean difference = 0.88; 0.62 to 1.14), and depression (mean difference = -5.68; -8.62 to -2.74). Significant improvement in these variables persisted in the meta-analyses of change scores. No significant difference was found in anxiety and quality of life. No severe adverse events were reported in any of the included studies.
Moderate- to very low-quality evidence demonstrates that telerehabilitation may be an effective and safe solution for patients with and survivors of COVID-19 in dyspnea, lower limb muscle strength, ambulation capacity, and depression. Further well-designed studies are required to evaluate the long-term effects, cost-effectiveness, and satisfaction in larger samples.

Papers