Objectives: This systematic review and meta‐analysis aims to evaluate the efficacy of pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) in improving dyspnea, fatigue, physical activity, quality of life, anxiety and depression in patients with Long COVID‐19 (LC). The impact of PR on LC and a comparison of face‐to‐face and telerehabilitation approaches was explored.Methods: This systematic review and meta‐analysis followed PRISMA guidelines and was registered in PROSPERO. A literature search included PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library until January 2023. No language filters were applied. Randomized controlled trials, non‐randomized controlled trials, and observational studies were included. The risk of bias was assessed using appropriate tools. Descriptive analysis and meta‐analysis were performed. Forest plots presented results. Statistical analyses were conducted using the Metafor Package in R v.3.4.2.Results/Findings: This systematic review and meta‐analysis included 16 studies on PR in LC patients. A total of 1027 adults were included. The studies varied in design, with seven observational studies, three quasi‐experimental studies, and six randomized controlled trials. Dyspnea, physical function, quality of life, psychological state, and fatigue were assessed as outcomes. The review found that pulmonary rehabilitation had a significant positive effect on dyspnea, physical function, quality of life (both global and physical domain), anxiety, and depression. However, the effect on fatigue was not significant. Heterogeneity was observed in some analyses, and publication bias was found in certain outcomes. Age and study design were identified as potential moderators. Both face‐to‐face and telerehabilitation interventions improved the studied outcomes, with only differences in the physical domain of quality of life favoring the face‐to‐face group.Implications on Physiotherapy Practice: PR improved dyspnea, physical function, quality of life, and psychological state in LC patients, but not fatigue. Face‐to‐face and telerehabilitation have similar effects, except for physical quality of life.

Paolo Pedersini, Camilo Corbellini, Jorge Hugo Villafañe; Italian Physical Therapists’ Response to the Novel COVID-19 Emergency, Physical Therapy, , pzaa060, h

BACKGROUND: The diaphragm changes in COPD lead to functional inefficiency correlated to lung function loss. Muscle-fiber shortening follows lung hyperinflation, which results in a chronic mechanical disadvantage that impairs diaphragmatic mobility that worsens in COPD exacerbations. OBJECTIVES: To correlate the diaphragmatic mobility loss to COPD severity by using M-mode ultrasonography and to verify if the diaphragmatic mobility can improve after in-patient pulmonary rehabilitation. METHODS: We used M-mode ultrasonography to access diaphragmatic mobility during normal breathing or breathing at rest and deep inspiration in 52 subjects with moderate to very severe COPD who underwent pulmonary rehabilitation and 16 healthy subjects. Lung function test, arterial blood gas analysis, and a 6-min walk test were also performed. The measurements were performed at rehabilitation admission and discharge. RESULTS: We screened 30 subjects with severe to very severe COPD who had completed pulmonary rehabilitation. At discharge, inspiratory capacity improved, from 1.58 ± 0.5L to 1.7 ± 0.6 L ( P = .04). Diaphragmatic mobility during deep inspirations increased from (mean ± SD) 4.58 ± 1.83 cm to 5.45 ± 1.56 cm ( P = .05) after pulmonary rehabilitation. The diaphragmatic mobility during rest breathing was higher in the subjects with COPD (2.25 ± 0.83 cm) than in the healthy subjects (1.27 ± 0.3 cm) ( P = .01). The diaphragmatic mobility for the rest breathing and deep inspirations were correlated to an FEV ₁ decrease (r = −0.74, P < .001; and r = 0.8, P < .001, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings demonstrated diaphragmatic mobility loss in the subjects with moderate to very severe COPD. These changes were correlated with COPD severity, and diaphragmatic mobility loss improved after in-patient pulmonary rehabilitation. (ClinicalTrial.gov registration NCT02838953.)

Background: Pulmonary Rehabilitation (PR) was initially developed for the management of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) and is now recognized as a core management of COVID-19 patients. This systematic review and meta-analysis examined the efficacy of PR in patients with post-acute COVID-19 infection. Methods: A literature search was conducted in PubMed, the Web of Science (WoS), and the Cochrane Library from their inceptions until October 2022, and randomized controlled trials and observational studies were considered. The outcomes measured included dyspnea, physical function, and quality of life. Results: Eleven studies including 677 participants with post-acute COVID-19 were included in this analysis. From a qualitative point of view and analyzing the studies separately, PR improves dyspnea, physical function, and quality of life in patients with post-acute COVID-19. However, in pooling the data of all the studies, no significant changes pre-postintervention, compared to the control, were found among the experimental studies included in the analysis in any outcome measures, due to the high heterogeneity between the studies, as well as no significant improvements being found in the observational studies. A subgroup analysis revealed significant differences in all the included outcomes. Future studies should include the same scale to assess the actual efficacy of PR. Conclusion: From a qualitative analysis point of view, PR is effective in improving physical function, reducing dyspnea, and improving quality of life in patients with post-acute COVID-19. However, an exploratory meta-analysis was performed to evaluate, by subgroups, the efficacy of PR, and positive results were found in favor of PR.

Purpose: To evaluate if the perimeter thoracic mobility (PTM) improvements could be identified by measuring its perimeter during pulmonary rehabilitation (PR), searching for its correlations with standards clinical and functional assessments. Design: A case series. Methods: Twenty patients underwent a PR and accessed the arterial blood gas analyses, FVC, FEV1, FEV/FEV1, 6-minute walk test (6MWT), and the PTM measurement assessed at the angle of the Louis level and the xiphoid process level. Results: PR improved PTM on the angle of Louis (p=0.03) but not on the xiphoid process. These improvements are negatively correlated with improvements in PaCO2. Conclusions: In COPD patients, a successful PR is accompanied by a reduction of the upper chest wall resting perimeter and by an improvement of the perimeter thoracic mobility. Clinical relevance: The centimeter tape is a useful device able to identify PTM improvements in COPD patients.

Currently, no international consensus on cardiac rehabilitation exists, leading to great variability in the intensity recommendations for training programs for cardiac patients, including those undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG). While some countries prefer the high-intensity interval training (HIIT) method to improve cardiorespiratory fitness, other countries opt for moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT). The aim of this systematic review was to compare the effects of HIIT and MICT on aerobic fitness and quality of life (QoL) in patients undergoing CABG with the intention of providing support for a consensus on exercise therapy. Methods: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted using the online publication databases PubMed, the Cochrane Library and the Bibliothèque nationale du Luxembourg (BnL) covering the last ten years to July 2022. Relevant identified studies respecting the inclusion/exclusion criteria were selected, screened and extracted by four reviewers. Furthermore, the methodological quality of the clinical trials was assessed using the PEDro scale, which was reinforced using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for Randomized Trials (RoB2) for the evaluation of the risk of bias to provide more detail in the evaluation. The certainty of the evidence analysis was established using different levels of evidence in accordance with the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework. Results: A total of 379 patients from five RCTs diagnosed with coronary artery disease, including patients undergoing CABG, performed aerobic exercise over different time periods and were assessed based on peakVO2, VO₂max and QoL. Overall, both training methods provided improvements in cardiorespiratory fitness and quality of life, with greater changes in HIIT groups. Conclusion: Both trainings methods provide improvements in cardiorespiratory fitness and QoL, with greater increases from HIIT. The moderate quality of evidence supports the use of HIIT and MICT to improve cardiorespiratory fitness and QoL.