Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30880952›Full record

Trial reportInternational journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Improving uptake and completion of pulmonary rehabilitation in COPD with lay health workers: feasibility of a clinical trial.

Patrick White, Gill Gilworth, Simon Lewin, Lauren Hogg, Rachel Tuffnell, Stephanie J C Taylor, Nicholas S Hopkinson, Nicholas Hart, Sally J Singh, Alison J Wright

Abstract readClinical Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Patrick WhiteDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, School of Population Health and Environmental Sciences, King's College London, London, UK, patrick.white@kcl.ac.uk.
Gill GilworthDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, School of Population Health and Environmental Sciences, King's College London, London, UK, patrick.white@kcl.ac.uk.
Simon LewinNorwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway.
Lauren HoggPhysiotherapy Department, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Rachel TuffnellThe Pulmonary Rehabilitation and Integrated Respiratory Team, King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Stephanie J C TaylorCentre for Primary Care and Public Health, Blizard Institute, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
Nicholas S HopkinsonNational Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Nicholas HartLane Fox Respiratory Service, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Sally J SinghCentre for Exercise and Rehabilitation Science, University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust, Leicester, UK.
Alison J WrightDepartment of Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology, University College London, London, UK.

Funding

Department of Health PB-PG-0213-30052
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis study was designed to evaluate the feasibility of a cluster randomized controlled trial to test the efficacy of lay health workers (LHWs) in improving the uptake and completion of pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) in the treatment of COPD. MATERIALS AND

methodsLHWs, trained in confidentiality, role boundaries, and behavior change techniques, supported patients newly referred for PR. Interactions between LHWs and participants were recorded with smartphones. Outcomes were recruitment and retention rates of LHWs, questionnaire and interview-evaluated acceptability and analysis of intervention fidelity.

resultsForty (36%) of 110 PR-experienced COPD patients applied to become LHWs. Twenty (18%) were selected for training. Twelve (11%) supported patients. Sixty-six COPD patients referred for PR received the intervention (5.5 participants per LHW). Ten LHWs were retained to the end of the study. Seventy-three percent of supported patients were satisfied or very satisfied with the intervention. LHWs delivered the intervention with appropriate style and variable fidelity. LHWs would welcome more intensive training. Based on this proof of concept, a cluster randomized controlled trial of an LHW intervention to improve uptake and completion of PR is feasible.

conclusionPR-experienced COPD patients can be recruited, trained, and retained as LHWs to support participation in PR, and can deliver the intervention. Participant COPD patients found the intervention acceptable. A cluster randomized controlled clinical trial is feasible.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeAdultAgedAged, 80 and overClinical CompetenceCommunity Health WorkersFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansInservice TrainingLondonLungMaleMiddle AgedPatient Satisfactioncompletionintervention fidelityrecruitmentretentionuptake

Identifiers

PMID30880952
PMCPMC6419591

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.