Key result
A 6-week community-based pulmonary rehabilitation program significantly increased six-minute walk test distances by a mean of 292 meters (p < 0.001) in patients with chronic pulmonary diseases.
Why the study?
The study was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of a community-based pulmonary rehabilitation program in central California.
Does a 6-week pulmonary rehabilitation program improve functional capacity and quality of life in patients with chronic respiratory conditions?
Observational (n=381)
No
Does a 6-week pulmonary rehabilitation program improve functional capacity and quality of life in patients with chronic respiratory conditions?
Mean Difference: 292
Absolute Event Rate: 925% vs 633%
p-value: p=<0.001
A 6-week community-based pulmonary rehabilitation program significantly improved functional capacity, quality of life, and reduced emergency department visits in patients with chronic respiratory diseases.
Supports pulmonary rehabilitation benefits in respiratory disease; hypothesis-generating and requires randomized trials before practice change.
INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a community based pulmonary rehabilitation program in central California. METHOD: This was a retrospective study approved by the institutional review board at Community Regional Medical Centers Fresno. Data were extracted from a pulmonary rehabilitation clinic at a Community Based Hospital in Fresno, CA, USA from 2016 to 2023. The program was designed as follows: patients completed a six-week program, two hours, twice/week. The program included the following: stretching, breathing, and personalized training/exercise. Main outcomes were the following data: six-minute walk tests (6MWT), shortness of breath questionnaire (SOB-Q), Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9), quality of life (QoL), and satisfaction level. RESULTS: The study included 381 participants, comprising 186 males and 195 females. Our findings demonstrated significant improvements post-program, including increased six-minute walk test (6MWT) distances (633 ± 316 to 925 ± 311 m, p < 0.001), reduced shortness of breath scores (52.28 ± 22.36 to 41.87 ± 20.9, p < 0.001), improved PHQ-9 depression scores (7.83 ± 5.46 to 4.70 ± 4.42, p < 0.001), and higher quality of life scores (16.0 ± 5.88 to 19.00 ± 6.15, p < 0.001). Patient satisfaction was high, with consistent positive feedback on program design and delivery. CONCLUSION: Our results showed that the program was effective in improving patients' quality of life, shortness of breath, and 6MWT. In addition, patients were satisfied with the program upon completion. Further longitudinal studies in different regions are strongly recommended to confirm and validate our findings.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ubhi et al. (2025) conducted an observational in Chronic pulmonary diseases (n=381). Community-based pulmonary rehabilitation program vs. Pre-program baseline was evaluated on Six-minute walk test (6MWT) distance in meters (MD 292, p=<0.001). A 6-week community-based pulmonary rehabilitation program significantly increased six-minute walk test distances by a mean of 292 meters (p < 0.001) in patients with chronic pulmonary diseases.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: