Key result
Pulmonary rehabilitation improves exercise tolerance and quality of life in patients with COPD and asthma.
Why the study?
Pulmonary rehabilitation is established in COPD but clinical results in asthma and other diseases are limited, necessitating a summary of evidence for both conditions.
Does pulmonary rehabilitation improve exercise tolerance and quality of life in patients with COPD and asthma?
Does pulmonary rehabilitation improve exercise tolerance and quality of life in patients with COPD and asthma?
Pulmonary rehabilitation is an effective non-pharmacological treatment for improving exercise tolerance and quality of life in patients with COPD and asthma.
May support pulmonary rehabilitation in COPD and asthma; leaves open confirmation from higher-level RCTs.
Despite the different pathological features of COPD and asthma, the two diseases often present similar clinical characteristics. In both diseases, patients suffer from exertional dyspnea and other medical conditions. Pulmonary rehabilitation in COPD patients has been reported to have various effects, including reduced dyspnea, improved quality of life, and increased aerobic capacity. Although there are few clinical results on pulmonary rehabilitation in diseases other than COPD, recent studies have shown that rehabilitation in non-COPD patients helps improve exercise tolerance and quality of life as in COPD patients. It is important that pulmonary rehabilitation in two distinctive obstructive pulmonary diseases eventually has a common goal of having a personalized patient-tailored treatment strategy. This review summarizes the pulmonary rehabilitation as a non-pharmacological treatment for COPD and asthma.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yong Beom Shin (2021) conducted a review in COPD and Asthma. Pulmonary rehabilitation was evaluated. Pulmonary rehabilitation is an effective non-pharmacological treatment that helps improve exercise tolerance and quality of life in patients with COPD and asthma.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: