To evaluate the effectiveness of exercise training in patients with very severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature databases using the following as search terms: COPD, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, Exercise, and Pulmonary Rehabilitation. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of subjects with forced expiratory volume in the first second of less than 35% of the predicted normal value enrolled in in-patient, outpatient, or home- or community-based training programs lasting at least 4 weeks with respect to usual care. We included RCTs with outcome measures including the 6-minute walking test and/or health-related quality of life assessed by the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ). Of 580 articles screened, 10 were included. The programs' duration ranged from 4 to 52 weeks with 1 to 5 sessions per week lasting 15 to 40 minutes each. The intervention group improved in 6-minute walking test [weighted mean difference, 67.1 (95% confidence interval [CI], 37.897–98.927); standardized mean difference, 3.86 (95% CI, 2.04–5.67)], and St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire [weighted mean difference, −8.041 (95% CI, −15.273 to −0.809); standardized mean difference, −1.23 (95% CI, −2.14 to −0.31)]. Exercise training improves exercise tolerance and health-related quality of life in patients with very severe COPD. However, because few studies on severely affected patients are available and the training programs are Highly heterogeneous, larger RCTs are needed.

There is a need of consensus about the pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) in patients with COVID-19 after discharge from acute care. To facilitate the knowledge of the evidence and its translation into practice, we developed suggestions based on experts’ opinion. A steering committee identified areas and questions sent to experts. Other international experts participated to a RAND Delphi method in reaching consensus and proposing further suggestions. Strong agreement in suggestions was defined when the mean agreement was >7 (1 = no agreement and 9 = maximal agreement). Panelists response rate was >95%. Twenty-three questions from 4 areas: Personnel protection equipment, phenotypes, assessments, interventions, were identified and experts answered with 121 suggestions, 119 of which received high level of concordance. The evidence-based suggestions provide the clinicians with current evidence and clinical experts opinion. This framework can be used to facilitate clinical decision making within the context of the individual patient. Further studies will evaluate the clinical usefulness of these suggestions.

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. Medline, CINAHL, and Pedro databases were searched from January 2020 to February 2021 for articles in the English language. Two investigators independently conducted the database 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. 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 31 evaluable studies was judged as low (11 studies) or fair (14 studies). Sample sizes of each study 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 meters for 6MWT respectively). 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.

Due to COVID-19 outbreak, to lighten the burden of acute and critical care hospitals, some respiratory rehabilitation departments have been used to host patients with COVID-19 in the post-acute phase. This new and unexpected situation required a change of roles and scheduling of the rehabilitation teams. In this manuscript we describe the unexpected and urgent organizational change of the Cardio-Pulmonary Rehabilitation (CPR) service during the COVID-19 emergency in a Northern Italian rehabilitation hospital, focusing on the Respiratory Physiotherapists’ (RPTs) role. A quick three-days complete reorganization of the entire hospital was needed. A COVID-19 care team including a multidisciplinary panel of physicians, nurses, and RPTs was quickly performed to manage 90 beds for post acute patients with COVID-19. Within the team, the RPTs changed their shifts, so as to be available 16h per day, 7 days out of 7. Remodelled tasks in charge of RPTs were: oxygen therapy daily monitoring, non invasive ventilation (NIV) and continuous positive airways pressure (CPAP) delivery, pronation and postural changes to improve oxygenation, reconditioning with leg/arm cranking and exercises, initial and final patients’ functional assessment by short-physical performance battery (SPPB) and 1-minute sit-to-stand test (1-STS) to evaluate motor conditions and exercise-induced oxygen desaturation. Three “what-to-do” algorithms were developed to guide: i) oxygen de-escalation by reducing inhaled fraction of oxygen (FiO2); ii) oxygenation improvement through the use of Venturi mask; iii) reconditioning and physical activity. One-hundred seventy patients were treated in one month. As main topics, RPTs have been involved in oxygen therapy management in almost a third of the admitted patients, reconditioning exercises in 60% of the cases, and initial and final functional motor capacity assessment in all patients. Details of activities performed by the RPT in one typical working day are also shown. Our reorganization has exploited the professional skills and clinical expertise of the RPTs. This re-organization can provide practical insights to other facilities that are facing this crisis, and may be a starting point for implementing post-COVID-19 rehabilitation. Future studies will have to improve and review this organization.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of bronchiectasis includes drugs, oxygen therapy, and bronchial-clearance maneuvers. OBJECTIVE: To assess the safety and efficacy of intrapulmonary percussive ventilation (IPV) compared to traditional standard chest physical therapy in patients with bronchiectasis and productive cough. METHODS: In a randomized crossover study, 22 patients underwent, on consecutive days, IPV and chest physical therapy. Before each treatment session, immediately after the session, 30 min after the session, and 4 hours after the session we measured SpO₂, heart rate, respiratory rate, and (with a visual analog scale) the patient9s subjective sensation of phlegm encumbrance and dyspnea. Immediately after each treatment session we also measured (via visual analog scale) the patient9s discomfort. We also measured the volume and wet and dry weight of collected sputum. RESULTS: No adverse effects were so severe as to require discontinuation of treatment, and the incidence of adverse effects was similar in the groups (27%). Heart rate (P = .002) and respiratory rate (P = .047) decreased during treatment, and sensation of phlegm encumbrance improved (P = .03) with both treatments. Only IPV improved (P = .004) the sensation of dyspnea. The patients found IPV more comfortable than our traditional standard chest physical therapy (P = .03). Both treatments caused important phlegm production, but there were no differences in sputum volume, wet weight, or dry weight. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with bronchiectasis and productive cough, short-term IPV was as safe and effective as traditional chest physical therapy, with less discomfort.

Manual therapy (MT) has been proposed in pulmonary rehabilitation programmes for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), but an updated systematic review of the evidence is lacking. We aimed to systematically review the effectiveness of MT interventions, alone or added to exercise, on lung function, exercise capacity and quality of life in COPD patients, compared to other therapies (e.g. exercise alone) or no treatment. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Physiotherapy Evidence Database, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases, using the terms: COPD, manual therapy, manipulation, joint mobilisation, osteopathic manipulation. Only randomised controlled trials (RCT) were considered. Out of 555 articles screened, 6 fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The study designs were heterogeneous (with different intervention schedules) and there was a high risk of bias. No effect on lung function was found, while results on exercise capacity were contrasting. MT had no effect on quality of life, although valid measures were available only in one study. Only mild adverse events were reported. Few RCTs of poor methodological quality are available on the effects of MT in COPD. More and better quality RCTs are needed before this technique can be included in rehabilitation programmes for these patients.