Exercise responses during endurance testing at different intensities in patients with COPD

Use of exercise testing in the evaluation of interventional efficacy: an official ERS statement

This document reviews 1) the measurement properties of commonly used exercise tests in patients with chronic respiratory diseases and 2) published studies on their utilty and/or evaluation obtained from MEDLINE and Cochrane Library searches between 1990 and March 2015.

Exercise tests are reliable and consistently responsive to rehabilitative and pharmacological interventions. Thresholds for clinically important changes in performance are available for several tests. In pulmonary arterial hypertension, the 6-min walk test (6MWT), peak oxygen uptake and ventilation/carbon dioxide output indices appear to be the variables most responsive to vasodilators. While bronchodilators do not always show clinically relevant effects in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, high-intensity constant work-rate (endurance) tests (CWRET) are considerably more responsive than incremental exercise tests and 6MWTs. High-intensity CWRETs need to be standardised to reduce interindividual variability. Additional physiological information and responsiveness can be obtained from isotime measurements, particularly of inspiratory capacity and dyspnoea. Less evidence is available for the endurance shuttle walk test. Although the incremental shuttle walk test and 6MWT are reliable and less expensive than cardiopulmonary exercise testing, two repetitions are needed at baseline. All exercise tests are safe when recommended precautions are followed, with evidence suggesting that no test is safer than others.

Exercise training for asbestos-related and other dust-related respiratory diseases: a randomised controlled trial

Background

The study aimed to determine the short and long-term effects of exercise training on exercise capacity and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) compared to usual care in people with dust-related pleural and interstitial respiratory diseases. No previous studies have specifically evaluated exercise training in this patient population.

Methods

Participants with a diagnosis of a dust-related respiratory disease including asbestosis and asbestos related pleural disease were recruited and randomised to an eight-week exercise training group (EG) or a control group (CG) of usual care. Six-minute walk distance (6MWD), St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) and Chronic Respiratory Disease Questionnaire (CRQ) were measured at baseline, eight weeks and 26 weeks by an assessor blinded to group allocation.

Results

Thirty-three of 35 male participants completed the study. Sixty-nine percent of participants had asbestos related pleural disease. At eight weeks, compared to the CG, the EG showed a significantly increased 6MWD (mean difference (95%CI)) 53 metres (32 to 74), improved SGRQ total score, -7 points (-13 to -1) and increased CRQ total score, 6.4 points (2.1 to 10.7). At 26 weeks significant between-group differences were maintained in 6MWD, 45 metres (17 to 73) and CRQ total score, 13.1 points (5.2 to 20.9).

Conclusion

Exercise training improved short and long-term exercise capacity and HRQoL in people with dust-related pleural and interstitial respiratory diseases.

Clinical trial registration number

ANZCTR12608000147381. Date trial registered: 27.03.2008.

Optimal intensity and type of leg exercise training for people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

Intensity of exercise is considered a key determinant of training response, however, no systematic review has investigated the effects of different levels of training intensity on exercise capacity, functional exercise capacity and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). As type of training (continuous or interval) may also affect training response, the effects of the type of training in COPD also require investigation.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effects of training intensity (higher versus lower) or type (continuous versus interval training) on primary outcomes in exercise capacity and secondary outcomes in symptoms and HRQoL for people with COPD.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched for studies in any language from the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, AMED, PsycINFO and PubMed. Searches were current as of June 2011.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials comparing higher training intensity to lower training intensity or comparing continuous training to interval training in people with COPD. We excluded studies that compared exercise training with no exercise training.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We pooled results of comparable groups of studies and calculated the treatment effect and 95% confidence intervals (CI) using a random-effects model. We made two separate comparisons of effects between: 1) higher and lower training intensity; 2) continuous and interval training. We contacted authors of missing data.

MAIN RESULTS

We analysed three included studies (231 participants) for comparisons between higher and lower-intensity training and eight included studies (367 participants) for comparisons between continuous and interval training. Primary outcomes were outcomes at peak exercise (peak work rate, peak oxygen consumption, peak minute ventilation and lactate threshold), at isowork or isotime, endurance time on a constant work rate test and functional exercise capacity (six-minute walk distance). When comparing higher versus lower-intensity training, the pooled primary outcomes were endurance time and six-minute walk distance. There were no significant differences in endurance time improvement (mean difference (MD) 1.07 minutes; 95% CI -1.53 to 3.67) and six-minute walk distance improvement (MD 2.8 metres; 95% CI -10.1 to 15.6) following higher or lower-intensity training. However, heterogeneity of the endurance time results between studies was significant. When comparing continuous and interval training, there were no significant differences in any of the primary outcomes, except for oxygen consumption at isotime (MD 0.08; 95% CI 0.01 to 0.16) but the treatment effect was not considered clinically important. According to the GRADE system, studies were of low to moderate quality.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Comparisons between the higher and lower training intensity were limited due to the small number of included studies and participants. Consequently, there are insufficient data to draw any conclusions on exercise capacity, symptoms and HRQoL for this comparison. For comparisons between continuous and interval training, both appear to be equally effective in improving exercise capacity, symptoms and HRQoL.

The effect of bronchodilators and oxygen alone and in combination on self-paced exercise performance in stable COPD

Both oxygen therapy and bronchodilators reduce exertional breathlessness and improve exercise tolerance in patients with stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). However their relative effectiveness and the value of their combined use on exercise performance has not been assessed. The effects of 5 mg of salbutamol plus 500 microg ipratropium bromide nebulisation followed by a 6-min walking test while breathing O(2) were studied in a randomised, single-blind, placebo controlled, crossover trial in 28 patients with severe or very severe COPD, breathless on exertion and with oxygen saturation < or = 89% at rest or on exercise. Bronchodilator reversibility was minimal. The 6-min walking distance increased from 356 (128)m to 377 (117)m after the bronchodilator (P<0.05), to 406 (109)m after supplementary oxygen but without bronchodilators (P 0.011 versus bronchodilators/air and 0.001 versus placebo/air), and to 430 (109)m after the combination of oxygen and the bronchodilators (P<0.0001 versus placebo/air and bronchodilators/air; P=0.014 versus placebo/oxygen). End-exercise dyspnea only fell significantly when oxygen and bronchodilator were combined. In severe or very severe COPD patients with relatively fixed airway obstruction bronchodilators enhance exercise performance obtained with oxygen. Clinically relevant improvement is possible when therapies with a different mechanism of action are combined.