Telerehabilitation significantly improved 6-minute walk distance (mean difference 25.52 m; 95% CI 9.48-41.56; p<0.01) compared with center-based rehabilitation in patients with COPD.
Meta-Analysis (n=1,726)
Does telerehabilitation improve functional capacity and quality of life compared to center-based pulmonary rehabilitation in COPD patients?
Telerehabilitation is an effective alternative to center-based pulmonary rehabilitation for improving functional capacity and quality of life in COPD patients.
Effect estimate: mean difference 25.52 m (95% CI 9.48-41.56)
p-value: p=<0.01
Abstract Rationale Pulmonary rehabilitation improves outcomes in COPD but faces poor accessibility and completion due to travel and logistical barriers. Telerehabilitation offers remote, home-based alternatives that may enhance adherence and maintain efficacy. Evaluating randomized trials comparing telerehabilitation with traditional programs is essential to determine relative benefits in exercise capacity, dyspnea, and healthcare utilization. Methods A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane Central for RCTs comparing telerehabilitation and center-based rehabilitation in COPD. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane RoB 2.0 tool. Results Seventeen randomized controlled trials comprising 1,726 COPD patients were included (1,059 males, 667 females). The telerehabilitation group included 892 participants and the center-based group 787, with a mean follow-up of 6.87 months and a pooled mean age of 68.1 years. Telerehabilitation significantly improved 6-minute walk distance (mean difference = 25.52 m; 95% CI 9.48-41.56; p 0.01) compared with center-based rehabilitation. Improvements in SGRQ total (mean difference = 1.49; 95% CI 0.03-2.94; p = 0.04) and symptom scores (mean difference = −5.67; 95% CI − 10.95 to − 0.40; p = 0.03) were observed, while activity and mMRC dyspnea scores showed no significant difference. Anxiety reduction (HADS-A) and daily step counts were comparable between groups. No significant differences were found in sedentary time, program cost, or all-cause readmissions (log OR = 0.61; 95% CI − 2.86 to 4.09; p = 0.73). Respiratory-related readmissions were slightly higher in the telerehabilitation group (log OR = 0.85; 95% CI 0.09-1.61; p = 0.03). Conclusion Telerehabilitation is as effective as center-based pulmonary rehabilitation in improving functional capacity and quality of life in COPD, with comparable safety, adherence, and costs; overall risk of bias was low. This abstract is funded by: None
Mahapatra et al. (Fri,) conducted a meta-analysis in COPD (n=1,726). Telerehabilitation vs. Center-based pulmonary rehabilitation was evaluated on 6-minute walk distance (mean difference 25.52 m, 95% CI 9.48-41.56, p=<0.01). Telerehabilitation significantly improved 6-minute walk distance (mean difference 25.52 m; 95% CI 9.48-41.56; p<0.01) compared with center-based rehabilitation in patients with COPD.