Skip to main content

Table 2 Characteristics of included studies included in the systematic review

From: Effectiveness of home-based pulmonary rehabilitation programs for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD): systematic review

Study (country)

Study period (Design)

Number of centres

Number of participants

Follow-up

HBPR intervention supervision

HBPR vs ‘usual care’

 Lahham 2020

(Australia) [10]

Apr 2015- Nov 2017

(RCT)

Multiple centres

HBPR: 29

Usual care: 29

6 months

• Weekly phone calls with physiotherapist

• Unsupervised home exercise training

 Coultas 2018

(USA) [11]

Apr 2010- Apr 2014

(RCT)

Single centre

HBPR: 149

Usual care: 156

18 months

• Weekly telephone calls

• Supervision not specified

 Li 2018

(China) [14]

Jun 2014- Apr 2016

(RCT

Single centre

HBPR: 82

Usual care: 69

12 months

• Bi-weekly home visits for 2 months

• Monthly home visit and weekly telephone calls for 4 months

• Weekly telephone calls for 6 months

• Unsupervised home exercise once per week (Supervised bi-weekly for first two months)

• Unsupervised respiratory training three times per week

 Khoshkesht 2015

(Iran) [15]

Dec 2010- Feb 2011

(RCT)

Single centre

HBPR: 35

Usual care: 35

7 weeks

• Weekly telephone calls with nurses Unsupervised home exercise training and breathing exercises

 Pradella 2015

(Brazil) [16]

NR

(RCT)

Single centre

HBPR: 32

Usual care: 18

8 weeks

• Weekly telephone call with nurse

• Unsupervised exercise training

 De Sousa Pinto 2014

(Spain) [17]

Oct 2009- Jun 2011

(RCT)

Single centre

HBPR: 29

Usual care: 21

12 weeks

• Weekly telephone calls

• Supervised exercise twice per week for two weeks followed by twice per month

• Unsupervised exercise weekly (frequency not specified)

 Liu 2013

(China) [18]

Dec 2009- Oct 2011

(RCT)

Single centre

HBPR: 30

Usual care: 30

4 months

• Online program with system monitored program participation

• Nurses contacted patients by telephone if they were not regularly logging into the system

 Mendes de Oliveira 2010

(Brazil) [19]

Jan 2007- May 2009

(RCT)

Single centre

HBPR: 42

Usual care: 29

12 weeks

• Weekly telephone calls from health care provider

• Home exercise program three times per week for 12 weeks (supervision not specified)

 Moore 2009

(UK) [20]

NR

(RCT)

Single centre

HBPR: 14

Usual care: 13

Mean ± SD

HBPR: 8 ± 3 weeks

Usual care: 7 ± 1 weeks

• Supervision not specified

 Lalmolda 2017

(Spain) [22]

Jan 2011- NR

Cohort study

Multiple centres

HBPR: 21

Usual care: 29

12 months

• Supervised program delivered by physiotherapist for one hour twice a week for 8 weeks

HBPR vs OPR

 Horton 2018

(UK) [21]

Nov 2007- Jul 2012

(RCT)

Single centre

HBPR: 145

OPR: 142

6 months

• Telephone calls during week two and week four

• Unsupervised exercise program

 Holland 2017

(Australia) [12]

Oct 2011- May 2015

(RCT)

Multiple centres

HBPR: 80

OPR: 86

12 months

• Weekly phone calls with physiotherapist

• Unsupervised home exercise training

 Mendes de Oliveira 2010

(Brazil) [19]

Jan 2007- May 2009

(RCT)

Single centre

HBPR: 42

OPR: 46

12 weeks

• Weekly telephone calls from health care provider

• Home exercise program three times per week for twelve weeks (supervision not specified)

 Nolan 2019

(UK) [23]

2012–2015

(Cohort study)

Single centre

HBPR: 154

OPR: 154

8 weeks

• Weekly telephone calls with physiotherapist

• Unsupervised exercise training

 Chaplin 2017

(UK) [13]

May 2013- Jul 2015

(RCT)

Multiple centres

HBPR: 51

OPR: 52

Mean ± SD

HBPR: 11 ± 4 weeks

OPR: NR

• Patients were contacted by a rehabilitation specialist weekly by email or telephone

• Supervision not specified

  1. Notes: No pulmonary rehabilitation (Usual care): patients were managed by their GP, specialist or both according to local practices
  2. HBPR home-based pulmonary rehabilitation, NR not reported, OPR outpatient pulmonary rehabilitation, RCT randomized controlled trial, SD standard deviation