共 50 条
Effectiveness of respiratory rehabilitation in patients with COVID-19: A meta-analysis
被引:8
|作者:
Ashra, Fauzi
[1
,2
]
Jen, Hsiu-Ju
[1
,3
]
Liu, Doresses
[1
,4
,5
]
Lee, Tso-Ying
[1
,6
]
Pien, Li-Chung
[7
,8
]
Chen, Ruey
[1
,3
,7
]
Lin, Hui-Chen
[1
,5
]
Chou, Kuei-Ru
[1
,3
,5
,9
,10
]
机构:
[1] Taipei Med Univ, Coll Nursing, Sch Nursing, 250 Wu Hsing St, Taipei 110, Taiwan
[2] Prima Nusantara Bukittinggi Univ, Bukittinggi, Indonesia
[3] Taipei Med Univ, Shuang Ho Hosp, Dept Nursing, New Taipei, Taiwan
[4] Taipei Med Univ, Wan Fang Hosp, Dept Nursing, Taipei, Taiwan
[5] Taipei Med Univ, Res Ctr Nursing Clin Practice, Wan Fang Hosp, Taipei, Taiwan
[6] Taipei Med Univ Hosp, Nursing Res Ctr, Dept Nursing, Taipei, Taiwan
[7] Taipei Med Univ, Coll Nursing, Postbaccalaureate Program Nursing, Taipei, Taiwan
[8] Taipei Med Univ, Wan Fang Hosp, Psychiat Res Ctr, Taipei, Taiwan
[9] Taipei Med Univ Hosp, Psychiat Res Ctr, Taipei, Taiwan
[10] Taipei Med Univ, Neurosci Res Ctr, Taipei, Taiwan
关键词:
coronavirus;
2019;
COVID-19;
pulmonary rehabilitation;
respiratory exercises;
respiratory rehabilitation;
PULMONARY REHABILITATION;
SOCIETY STATEMENT;
EXERCISE;
ADULTS;
D O I:
10.1111/jocn.16692
中图分类号:
R47 [护理学];
学科分类号:
1011 ;
摘要:
AimExamine effectiveness of respiratory rehabilitation and moderating factors on lung function and exercise capacity in post-COVID-19 patients. DesignMeta-analysis. MethodsR software 4.0.2 assessed the effectiveness of respiratory rehabilitation adopting the random-effects model and presenting standardised mean differences (SMDs). Heterogeneity was determined by Cochran's Q and I-2. The Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 and MINORS evaluated quality of the included studies. Data SourcesA comprehensive search was undertaken in Cochrane, Embase, Ovid-MEDLINE, Scopus, NCBI SARS-CoV-2 Resources, ProQuest, Web of Science and CINAHL until March 2022. ResultsOf the 5703 identified studies, 12 articles with 596 post-COVID-19 patients were included. Eleven of our twelve studies had moderate to high quality and one study had high risk of bias assessed with MINORS and RoB 2 tool. Overall, respiratory rehabilitation was effective in improving forced expiratory volume in 1 s (1.14; 95%CI 0.39-1.18), forced vital capacity (0.98; 95%CI 0.39-1.56), total lung capacity (0.83; 95%CI 0.22-1.44), 6-minute walk distance (1.56; 95%CI 1.10-2.02) and quality of life (0.99; 95%CI 0.38-1.60). However, no significant differences were observed for ratio of the forced expiratory volume in 1 s to the forced vital capacity of the lungs, anxiety and depression. Respiratory rehabilitation for post-COVID-19 patients was effective in those without comorbidities, performed four types of exercise programs, frequency >= 3 times/week and rehabilitation time 6 weeks. ConclusionsRespiratory rehabilitation improved lung function, exercise capacity and quality of life in post-COVID-19 patients. The findings suggest rehabilitation programs for post-COVID-19 patients should use multiple respiratory exercise programs with frequency of >= 3 times per week for longer than 6 weeks. ImpactThese findings will help improve the implementation of respiratory rehabilitation programs for post-COVID-19 patients. Implications for the professionOur findings can be used to develop patient-centred respiratory rehabilitation interventions by nurses and clinicians for post-COVID-19 patients. Reporting MethodPRISMA guideline was followed. Patient or Public ContributionNo patient or public contribution.
引用
收藏
页码:4972 / 4987
页数:16
相关论文