Physical rehabilitation in Intensive Care Unit in acute respiratory distress syndrome patients with COVID-19

Effectiveness of Rehabilitation Interventions in Individuals With Emerging Virtual Respiratory Tract Infectious Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

Assessing rehabilitation effectiveness for persistent symptoms post-infection with emerging viral respiratory diseases.

DATA SOURCES

Systematic review of seven databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, PEDro, MedRxiv, CNKI, Wanfang) until 30 December 2023.

REVIEW METHODS

Evaluated 101 studies (9593 participants) on respiratory function, exercise capacity, and quality of life. Methodological quality was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration's Risk of Bias tool for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for observational studies and non-RCTs, and the NIH Quality Assessment Tools for before-after studies.

RESULTS

The most common rehabilitation program combined breathing exercises with aerobic exercise or strength training. Rehabilitation interventions significantly enhanced respiratory function, as evidenced by improvements on the Borg Scale (MD, -1.85; 95% CI, -3.00 to -0.70, low certainty), the mMRC Dyspnea Scale (MD, -0.45; 95% CI, -0.72 to -0.18, low certainty), and the Multidimensional Dyspnoea-12 Scale (MD, -4.64; 95% CI, -6.54 to -2.74, moderate certainty). Exercise capacity also improved, demonstrated by results from the Six-Minute Walk Test (MD, 38.18; 95% CI, 25.33-51.03, moderate certainty) and the Sit-to-Stand Test (MD, 3.04; 95% CI, 1.07-5.01, low certainty).

CONCLUSION

Rehabilitation interventions are promising for survivors of viral respiratory diseases, yet gaps in research remain. Future investigations should focus on personalizing rehabilitation efforts, utilizing remote technology-assisted programs, improving research quality, and identifying specific subgroups for customized rehabilitation strategies to achieve the best outcomes for survivors.

Psychophysiological Adaptations to Exercise Training in COVID-19 Patients: A Systematic Review

Introduction

Many COVID-19 patients display adverse symptoms, such as reduced physical ability, poor quality of life, and impaired pulmonary function. Therefore, this systematic review is aimed at evaluating the effectiveness of physical exercise on various psychophysiological indicators among COVID-19 patients who may be at any stage of their illness (i.e., critically ill, hospitalized, postdischarge, and recovering).

Methods

A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, and Google Scholar from 2019 to 2021. Twenty-seven studies, which assessed a total of 1525 patients, were included and analysed.

Results

Overall, data revealed significant improvements in the following parameters: physical function, dyspnoea, pulmonary function, quality of life (QOL), lower limb endurance and strength, anxiety, depression, physical activity level, muscle strength, oxygen saturation, fatigue, C-reactive protein (CRP), interleukin 6 (IL-6), tumour necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α), lymphocyte, leukocytes, and a fibrin degradation product (D-dimer).

Conclusions

Physical training turns out to be an effective therapy that minimises the severity of COVID-19 in the intervention group compared to the standard treatment. Therefore, physical training could be incorporated into conventional treatment of COVID-19 patients. More randomized controlled studies with follow-up evaluations are required to evaluate the long-term advantages of physical training. Future research is essential to establish the optimal exercise intensity level and assess the musculoskeletal fitness of recovered COVID-19 patients. This trial is registered with CRD42021283087.

Effectiveness of Rehabilitation Interventions on Adults With COVID-19 and Post-COVID-19 Condition. A Systematic Review With Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness of rehabilitation interventions for adults with COVID-19 and post COVID-19 condition (PCC) in all settings.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, and Physiotherapy Evidence Database were searched from inception to December 31st, 2021. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42021258553.

STUDY SELECTION

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized studies of interventions (NRSI) according to the University of Alberta Evidence-based Practice Center.

DATA EXTRACTION

One author extracted data using a predetermined Excel form.

DATA SYNTHESIS

The meta-analysis indicates uncertain evidence about the effect of pulmonary rehabilitation and self-activities on exercise capacity (MD 65.06, 95% CI 42.87 to 87.25), respiratory function (forced expiratory volume in the first second [FEV1]: MD 0.16, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.28; FEV1/forced vital capacity [FVC]: MD 0.05, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.09; FVC: MD 0.19, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.42) and anxiety (MD -12.03, 95% CI -21.16 to -2.90) in mild COVID-19 and PCC patients. According to the narrative synthesis, including RCTs and NRSI, prone positioning seems to show improvements in vital parameters in severe COVID-19 post intensive care unit (ICU) discharge, pulmonary rehabilitation in activities of daily living, and qigong exercise and acupressure rehabilitation program, and "twist and raise" walking technique in reducing dyspnea and weakness in any degree of severity of COVID-19 and PCC. Functional electrical stimulation-cycling or early rehabilitation programs seem to support a faster recovery in patients with moderate COVID-19 after ICU discharge. Yoga and naturopathy, Mandala coloring, and respiratory exercise seem to reduce anxiety and depression in patients with moderate and mild COVID-19. Cognitive motor training seems to improve cognitive function in PCC patients.

CONCLUSIONS

There is very uncertain evidence about the effect of pulmonary rehabilitation on exercise capacity and respiratory function in patients with mild COVID-19 and PCC. Further high-quality research is required to improve the certainty of evidence available to support rehabilitation's crucial role in managing COVID-19.

Efficacy of Early Rehabilitation for Severe Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pneumonia: Factor Analysis Using Machine Learning

Objectives

Patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) who develop pneumonia face the risk of ventilatory muscle disuse in the acute phase, which can result in persistent respiratory impairments in the subacute phase. Although rehabilitation during the acute phase is considered effective, there are limited reports on this topic. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of acute-phase rehabilitation in patients with severe COVID-19.

Methods

The study included 57 patients (45 men and 12 women; mean age: 63.2±12.1 years) admitted between April and June 2021, all of whom required intubation for respiratory management. Among them, 34 patients underwent acute-phase rehabilitation interventions based on the early goal-directed mobilization protocol. The primary objectives were to assess the occurrence of medical accidents related to acute-phase rehabilitation and evaluate their impact on survival and mobility upon hospital discharge. Statistical techniques and machine learning algorithms were employed for data analysis.

Results

Remarkably, no medical accidents occurred during the acute-phase rehabilitation among the patients. Furthermore, our findings indicated that acute-phase rehabilitation did not influence survival outcomes. However, it did have a positive impact on the mobility of patients upon hospital discharge.

Conclusions

Acute-phase rehabilitation can be safely administered to patients with severe COVID-19 by following an early goal-directed mobilization protocol. This approach may also contribute to improved activities of daily living after discharge.

Implementation of Early Rehabilitation in Severe COVID-19 Respiratory Failure

The purpose of this scoping review is to describe current clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for early rehabilitation for individuals hospitalized in an intensive care unit with COVID-19 and examine practice patterns for implementation of mobility-related interventions.

Methods

PubMed, EMBASE, and CINAHL databases were searched from January 1, 2020, through April 1, 2022. Selected studies included individuals hospitalized with severe COVID-19 and provided objective criteria for clinical decision making for mobility interventions. A total of 1464 publications were assessed for eligibility and data extraction. The PRISMA-ScR Checklist and established guidelines for reporting for scoping reviews were followed.

Results

Twelve articles met inclusion criteria: 5 CPGs and 7 implementation articles. Objective clinical criteria and guidelines for implementation of early rehabilitation demonstrated variable agreement across systems. No significant adverse events were reported.

Conclusions

Sixty percent (3/5) of CPGs restrict mobility for individuals requiring ventilatory support of more than 60% Fio₂ (fraction of inspired oxygen) and/or positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) greater than 10-cm H₂O (positive end-expiratory pressure). Preliminary evidence from implementation studies may suggest that some individuals with COVID-19 requiring enhanced ventilatory support outside of established parameters may be able to safely participate in mobility-related interventions, though further research is needed to determine safety and feasibility to guide clinical decision making.

Systematic Review of COVID-19-Related Physical Activity-Based Rehabilitations: Benefits to Be Confirmed by More Robust Methodological Approaches

The first emergency was to receive and treat COVID-19 patients in their acute phase; today, there is a clear need to propose appropriate post-acute rehabilitation programs. The aim of this research was to systematically review the effects of physical activity programs in the recovery of post-COVID-19 patients. The literature search followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines, was registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42022289219), and was conducted between August and December 2021. A total of 35 studies out of the 1528 initially identified were finally included in the analysis. The systematic review clearly showed the health benefits of rehabilitation including physical activity in post-COVID-19 recovery, regardless of exercise modalities. These positive results were even observed using minor muscle re-mobilization for severe cases (i.e., postural changes, few steps—2 times/day) or using low volumes of exercise for mild-to-moderate cases (i.e., 120 min/week). A total of 97% of the 29 studies that performed statistical analyses demonstrated a significant increase in at least one parameter of functional capacity, and 96% of the 26 studies that statistically investigated the effects on the quality of life, mental health, and general state reported improvements. Yet, most of the studies were retrospective, uncontrolled, and enrolled aged people with comorbidities presented in severe forms of COVID-19. Physical activity programs, in addition to their high heterogeneity, remained poorly described in 83% of the studies and were part of a multidisciplinary program for 89% of the studies. Despite promising results, there is today a real need for prospective well-designed studies specifically assessing the effects of physical activity. In addition, it might appear relevant to propose standardized programs further considering the main characteristics of patients such as age, comorbidities, or the severity of COVID-19.

Appropriate Timing and Type of Physical Training in Patients with COVID-19 for Muscle Health and Quality of Life: A Systematic Review

Physical activity is beneficial to modulate immune system function and has inverse relationship to ARDS linked with SARS-CoV-2. Physical activity consists of daily activity and physical training. Studies regarding effect of physical training on patients with COVID-19 are controversial. This systematic review aims to investigate physical training on muscle health and QOL in patients with COVID-19. The literature review was carried out using keywords: (Exercise) AND (COVID) AND (Muscle) AND (Observational Study) in several databases of PubMed and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL). All references were reviewed using critical appraisal Newcastle Ottawa Scale (NOS) and Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine (CEBM) checklist. The studies were subsequently screened for reporting exercise, muscle, and COVID-19. The descriptions of the extracted data are guided by Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews (PRISMA) statement with GRADE approach. This study is registered in PROSPERO: ID CRD42021295188. Six studies pooled and entered review synthesis. Studies were reviewed using critical appraisal by NOS and CEBM. Two clinical trial studies and four observational designs were selected. Our result showed physical training improved patients' outcomes in the acute phase, critical phase, and post-COVID-19 phase. Multiple types of physical trainings were suggested by those studies, and most of them showed beneficial effects to patients with COVID-19 in different phases. The level of evidence by GRADE was downgraded, and further investigations are needed to establish guidelines and strong recommendation for a specific stage of COVID-19.

Resistance Training before, during, and after COVID-19 Infection: What Have We Learned So Far?

At the end of 2019, a severe acute respiratory syndrome caused by SARS-CoV-2 started a pandemic, leading to millions of deaths and many important political and social changes. Even in the absence of contamination, the mobility reduction, social distancing and closing of exercise facilities negatively affected physical activity and conditioning, which is associated with muscle atrophy, loss of muscle strength, and reductions in functional capacity. In cases of infection, it has been shown that increased physical capacity is associated with decreased hospitalization and mortality risk. Although millions of people have died from COVID-19, most contaminated individuals survived the infection, but carried different sequelae, such as the severe loss of physical function and a reduced quality of life. Among different physical exercise models that might help to prevent and treat COVID-19-related conditions, resistance training (RT) might be particularly relevant. Among its benefits, RT can be adapted to be performed in many different situations, even with limited space and equipment, and is easily adapted to an individual's characteristics and health status. The current narrative review aims to provide insights into how RT can be used in different scenarios to counteract the negative effects of COVID-19. By doing this, the authors expect to provide insights to help deal with the current pandemic and similar events the world may face in the future.

Health management of patients with COVID-19: is there a room for hydrotherapeutic approaches?

With highly variable types of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) symptoms in both severity and duration, there is today an important need for early, individualized, and multidisciplinary strategies of rehabilitation. Some patients present persistent affections of the respiratory function, digestive system, cardiovascular function, locomotor system, mental health, sleep, nervous system, immune system, taste, smell, metabolism, inflammation, and skin. In this context, we highlight here that hydrothermal centers should be considered today as medically and economically relevant alternatives to face the urgent need for interventions among COVID-19 patients. We raise the potential benefits of hydrotherapy programs already existing which combine alternative medicine with respiratory care, physical activity, nutritional advice, psychological support, and physiotherapy, in relaxing environments and under medical supervision. Beyond the virtues of thermal waters, many studies reported medical benefits of natural mineral waters through compressing, buoyancy, resistance, temperature changes, hydrostatic pressure, inhalations, or drinking. Thermal institutions might offer individualized follow-up helping to unclog hospitals while ensuring the continuity of health care for the different clinical manifestations of COVID-19 in both post-acute and chronic COVID-19 patients. Our present review underlines the need to further explore the medical effectiveness, clinical and territorial feasibility, and medico-economic impacts of the implementation of post-COVID-19 patient management in hydrotherapeutic establishments.

Respiratory rehabilitation in patients recovering from severe acute respiratory syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

With an increase in published reports on respiratory rehabilitation (RR) in severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), there is a need for a meta-analysis and systematic review to measure the effects of the RR in SARS.

OBJECTIVE

Objective of the review was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of RR in patients recovering from SARS.

METHODS

PubMed/ MEDLINE, CENTRAL, EMBASE, and Clinical Trial Registries were systematically searched (between January 1, 2003, to July 31, 2021) to identify all patients who received RR, at least for six days, following SARS. The primary outcome was exercise capacity [6-meter walking distance (6-MWD)], and secondary outcomes were change in pulmonary function test (PFT) parameters, activities in daily livings (ADLs), and quality of life (QoL). Meta-analysis was performed by using RevMan 5.4.

RESULTS

Twenty-one observational studies, including eight comparative studies, were included. Eight comparative studies participated in quantitative meta-analysis. The intervention group, who received RR, improved significantly in exercise capacity (6-MWD) [mean difference (MD):45.79, (95% CI:31.66-59.92)] and PFT parameters, especially in forced vital capacity (FVC%) [MD:4.38, (95% CI:0.15-8.60)], and diffusion lung capacity for carbon monoxide (DLCO%) [MD:11.78, (95% CI:5.10-18.46)]. The intervention group failed to demonstrate significant improvement in ADLs and QoL outcomes. No significant adverse events were reported during the intervention.

CONCLUSION

Respiratory rehabilitation can improve exercise capacity and PFT parameters in patients recovering from SARS infection. The RR does not cause serious adverse events. Clinical trials to determine the best RR program (in terms of initiation, duration, and components) in SARS and its treatment efficacy, both in the short and long- term are needed.

Correlations between Electro-Diagnostic Findings, the Severity of Initial Infection, and the Rehabilitation Outcomes among COVID-19 Patients

Simple Summary

Patients with Coronavirus-2019 (COVID-19) often have reduced muscle strength and loss of sensory function. We examined several properties of the function of the nerve located at the arm and leg of 19 COVID-19 hospitalized patients before and after their rehabilitation period. We also evaluated the severity of their illness, their gait, muscle strength, and level of disability. We isolated several factors in the function of their nerves, which can be used to predict their prognosis and rehabilitation outcomes. Our findings are important since clinicians can use examinations of nerve function at early stages of the illness in order to devise an optimal treatment plan for the patient, thereby reducing the hospitalization period and promoting patient’s independence.

Abstract

Patients with Coronavirus-2019 (COVID-19) manifest many neuromuscular complications. We evaluated the correlations between electromyography and nerve conduction measurements among COVID-19 patients and the severity of the initial infection, as well as the rehabilitation outcomes, and searched for the factors which best predict the rehabilitation outcomes. A total of 19 COVID-19 patients (16 men; mean ± SD age 59.1 ± 10.4), with WHO clinical progression scale of 6.8 ± 2.3, received rehabilitation for 3.9 ± 2.5 months. The Functional Independence Measure (FIM), the 10 m walk test, the 6 minute walk test, and grip force were collected before and after the rehabilitation period. Motor Nerve Conduction (MNC), Sensory Nerve Conduction (SNC) and electromyographic abnormalities were measured. All of the MNC measures of the median nerve correlated with the WHO clinical progression scale and duration of acute hospitalization. The MNC and SNC measures correlated with the rehabilitation duration and with FIM at discharge. The MNC distal latency of the median and the peroneal nerves and the MNC velocity of the median and tibial nerves predicted 91.6% of the variance of the motor FIM at discharge. We conclude that nerve conduction measurements, especially in COVID-19 patients with severe illness, are important in order to predict prognosis and rehabilitation outcomes.

Is tele-rehabilitation superior to home exercise program in COVID-19 survivors following discharge from intensive care unit? - A study protocol of a randomized controlled trial

Background and Purpose

Evaluating the patients with COVID‐19 following discharge from intensive care unit for pulmonary rehabilitation is crucial. It could be difficult to participate rehabilitation program due to transportation problems and cautions for contagiousness. Tele‐rehabilitation could serve as a favorable alternative. The primary aim of this study is to investigate whether supervised telerehabilitation is superior to home exercise program regarding walking distance and secondarily muscle strength, muscle endurance, quality of life, physical activity level and perceived respiratory disability.

Methods

This is a randomized assessor blinded control trial with two groups; tele‐rehabilitation and home exercise. One hundred twenty‐two COVID‐19 survivors following discharge from intensive care unit will be allocated into two groups. The tele‐rehabilitation group will receive breathing, aerobic, posture, stretching, strengthening exercises at their home under remote supervision via Internet for 3 days/week for 10 weeks. Home exercise group will receive the same program at their home on their own and they will be called weekly. The patients will be evaluated at the beginning, at the end of the program, 6^th and 12^th months following the rehabilitation. The primary outcome is the change in 6‐minute walking distance; the secondary outcomes are changes in quality of life, physical function, health status, dyspnea and muscle strength.

Impact Statement

This detailed description of the rehabilitation protocol will guide to plan the rehabilitation program and help how to design an efficacy study comparing different models of rehabilitation in COVID‐19 survivors following discharge from intensive care unit with evidence‐based contribution to the literature.

Pulmonary rehabilitation principles in SARS-COV-2 infection (COVID-19): The revised guideline for the acute, subacute, and post-COVID-19 rehabilitation

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a contagious infection disease, which may cause respiratory, physical, psychological, and generalized systemic dysfunction. The severity of disease ranges from an asymptomatic infection or mild illness to mild or severe pneumonia with respiratory failure and/or death. COVID-19 dramatically affects the pulmonary system. This clinical practice guideline includes pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) recommendations for adult COVID-19 patients and has been developed in the light of the guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of COVID-19 provided by the World Health Organization and Republic of Turkey, Ministry of Health, recently published scientific literature, and PR recommendations for COVID-19 regarding basic principles of PR. This national guideline provides suggestions regarding the PR methods during the clinical stages of COVID-19 and post-COVID-19 with its possible benefits, contraindications, and disadvantages.

Measures of physical performance in COVID-19 patients: a mapping review

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

There is evidence of short- and long-term impairment of physical performance in patients with COVID-19 infection, but a verification of measures of physical impairment in this condition is lacking. We reviewed the measures used to assess physical performance in these patients. Secondary targets were measures of exercise or daily life activities induced symptoms.

METHODS

Medline, CINAHL, and Pedro databases were searched from January 2020 to February 2021 for articles in the English language. Two investigators independently conducted the search, screened all titles and/or abstracts based on the inclusion criteria and independently scored the studies. The quality of the studies was evaluated by two reviewers according to the NIH quality assessment tool for observational cohort and cross-sectional studies. Discrepancies were resolved through consensus.

RESULTS

Out of 156 potentially relevant articles, 31 observational studies (8 cross-sectional), 1 randomized controlled trial, and 1 protocol were included. The quality of most of the 31 evaluable studies was judged as low (11 studies) or fair (14 studies). Sample sizes of the studies ranged from 14 to 20,889 patients. among the 28 reported measures, Barthel Index (42.4% of studies), Six-Minute Walking Distance Test (36.4%), Short Physical Performance Battery (21.2%) and 1-Minute Sit-to-Stand (12.1%) were the most used. Fifteen% and 36% of studies reported exercise induced desaturation and dyspnoea when performing the assessments, respectively. Other exercise induced symptoms were fatigue and pain. Studies reported wide ranges of impairment in physical performance as compared to "reference" values (range of mean or median reported values vs "reference values": 11-77 vs 100 points for Barthel Index; 11-22 vs 22-37 repetitions/min for 1m-STS; 0.5-7.9 vs 11.4 ± 1.3 points for SPPB; and 45-223 vs 380-782 m for 6MWT respectively).

CONCLUSION

This review found that a wide variety of functional status tests have been used, making comparisons difficult between studies. These measures show impairment in physical performance in COVID-19 patients. However, the quality of most of the studies was judged as low or fair.