Skip to main content

Table 3 Studies comparing HBPR to ‘usual care’

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

Outcomes

№ of participants (studies)

Certainty of the evidence (GRADE)

Relative effect (95% CI)

Anticipated absolute effects

Risk with ‘usual care’

Risk difference with HBPR

Health-related quality of life - COPD Assessment Test (CAT) scores following completion of intervention

151 (1 RCT)

LOWa,b

Mean score = 0

0 (0 to 0)

Frequency of exacerbations over duration of intervention

178 (2 RCTs)

VERY LOWc,d,e

not estimable

207 per 1000

207 fewer per 1000

Frequency of exacerbations over duration of intervention

48 (1 comparative observational study)

VERY LOWe

not estimable

276 per 1000

276 fewer per 1000

6 min walk test (6MWT/6MWD) in meters at the end of PR

745 (7 RCTs)

VERY LOWd,f,g

not pooled

not pooled

Hospital admissions rate related to COPD at the end of PR

305 (1 RCT)

LOWa,e

not estimable

301 per 1000

301 fewer per 1000

Hospital admissions rate related to COPD at the end of PR

48 (1 comparative observational study)

VERY LOWb

not estimable

138 per 1000

138 fewer per 1000

Health-related quality of life - St. George’s respiratory questionnaire (SGRQ) total score following completion of intervention

160 (3 RCTs)

LOWb,h

not pooled

not pooled

  1. The risk in the intervention group is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention
  2. Explanations
  3. aStudy at high risk of attrition bias
  4. bSmall sample size
  5. cOne study at high risk of attrition bias and one study at high risk of detection bias
  6. dPoint estimates are different across studies
  7. eLower number of events
  8. fStudies at high risk of attrition bias
  9. gIndirect outcome
  10. hStudies at high risk of detection bias