Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://bura.brunel.ac.uk/handle/2438/23794
Title: Minimal versus specialist equipment in the delivery of pulmonary rehabilitation: Protocol for a non-inferiority randomised controlled trial
Authors: Nolan, CM
Walsh, JA
Patel, S
Barker, RE
Polgar, O
Maddocks, M
Gao, W
Wilson, R
Fiorentino, F
Man, W
Issue Date: 18-Oct-2021
Citation: Nolan, C.M. et al. (2021) 'Minimal versus specialist equipment in the delivery of pulmonary rehabilitation: protocol for a non-inferiority randomised controlled trial', BMJ Open 11, e047524, pp. 1 - 8. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-047524.
Abstract: Introduction: Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR), an exercise and education programme for people with chronic lung disease, aims to improve exercise capacity, breathlessness and quality of life. Most evidence to support PR is from trials that use specialist exercise equipment, for example, treadmills (PR-gym). However, a significant proportion of programmes do not have access to specialist equipment with training completed with minimal exercise equipment (PR-min). There is a paucity of robust literature examining the efficacy of supervised, centre-based PR-min. We aim to determine whether an 8-week supervised, centre-based PR-min programme is non-inferior to a standard 8-week supervised, centre-based PR-gym programme in terms of exercise capacity and health outcomes for patients with chronic lung disease. Methods and analysis: Parallel, two-group, assessor-blinded and statistician-blinded, non-inferiority randomised trial. 436 participants will be randomised using minimisation at the individual level with a 1:1 allocation to PR-min (intervention) or PR-gym (control). Assessment will take place pre-PR (visit 1), post-PR (visit 2) and 12 months following visit 1 (visit 3). Exercise capacity (incremental shuttle walk test), dyspnoea (Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire (CRQ)-Dyspnoea), health-related quality of life (CRQ), frailty (Short Physical Performance Battery), muscle strength (isometric quadriceps maximum voluntary contraction), patient satisfaction (Global Rating of Change Questionnaire), health economic as well as safety and trial process data will be measured. The primary outcome is change in exercise capacity between visit 1 and visit 2. Two sample t-tests on an intention to treat basis will be used to estimate the difference in mean primary and secondary outcomes between patients randomised to PR-gym and PR-min. Ethics and dissemination: London-Camden and Kings Cross Research Ethics Committee and Health Research Authority have approved the study (18/LO/0315). Results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals, presented at international conferences, disseminated through social media, patient and public routes and directly shared with stakeholders. Trial registration number: ISRCTN16196765 (https://isrctn16196765/).
Description: Supplementary Data are available online at: https://bmjopen.bmj.com/highwire/filestream/224332/field_highwire_adjunct_files/0/bmjopen-2020-047524supp001_data_supplement.pdf .
URI: https://bura.brunel.ac.uk/handle/2438/23794
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-047524
Other Identifiers: ORCiD: Claire M Nolan https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9067-599X
ORCiD: Wei Gao https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8298-3415
e047524
Appears in Collections:Dept of Health Sciences Research Papers

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
FullText.pdfCopyright information: © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ. This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to copy, redistribute, remix, transform and build upon this work for any purpose, provided the original work is properly cited, a link to the licence is given, and indication of whether changes were made. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.713.74 kBAdobe PDFView/Open


This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons