Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33866476›Full record

ArticleHealth economics review2021

Preferences of patients with asthma or COPD for treatments in pulmonary rehabilitation.

Kathrin Damm, Heidrun Lingner, Katharina Schmidt, Ines Aumann-Suslin, Heike Buhr-Schinner, Jochen van der Meyden, Konrad Schultz

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health economics review, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 26% of its field
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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. 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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Kathrin Damm *Center for Health Economics Research Hannover (CHERH), Leibniz University of Hanover, Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Otto-Brenner-Str. 7, 30159, Hannover, Germany. kd@cherh.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3983-1149
Heidrun Lingner *Biomedical Research in Endstage and Obstructive Lung Disease Hannover (BREATH), Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Hannover, Germany.
Katharina SchmidtCenter for Health Economics Research Hannover (CHERH), Leibniz University of Hanover, Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Otto-Brenner-Str. 7, 30159, Hannover, Germany.
Ines Aumann-SuslinCenter for Health Economics Research Hannover (CHERH), Leibniz University of Hanover, Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Otto-Brenner-Str. 7, 30159, Hannover, Germany.
Heike Buhr-SchinnerDepartment of Internal Medicine / Pneumology, Ostseeklinik Schönberg-Holm, Ostseebad Schönberg, Germany.
Jochen van der MeydenDepartment of Internal Medicine / Pneumology, Klinik Wehrawald der Bundesversicherungsanstalt für Angestellte Todtmoos, Berlin, Germany.
Konrad SchultzCenter for Rehabilitation, Pneumology and Orthopaedics, Klinik Bad Reichenhall, Bad Reichenhall, Germany.
German Center for Lung Research · DEBundeswehrkrankenhaus · DEKlinik Bad Reichenhall · DEMedizinische Hochschule Hannover · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionPulmonary rehabilitation (PR) aims to improve disease control in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and asthma. However, the success of PR-programs depends on the patients' participation and willingness to cooperate. Taking the patients' preferences into consideration might improve both of these factors. Accordingly, our study aims to analyze patients' preferences regarding current rehabilitation approaches in order to deduce and discuss possibilities to further optimize pulmonary rehabilitation. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: At the end of a 3 weeks in-house PR, patients' preferences concerning the proposed therapies were assessed during two different time slots (summer 2015 and winter 2015/2016) in three clinics using a choice-based conjoint analysis (CA). Relevant therapy attributes and their levels were identified through literature search and expert interviews. Inclusion criteria were as follows: PR-inpatient with asthma and/or COPD, confirmed diagnosis, age over 18 years, capability to write and read German, written informed consent obtained. The CA analyses comprised a generalized linear mixed-effects model and a latent class mixed logit model.

resultsA total of 542 persons participated in the survey. The most important attribute was sport and exercise therapy. Rehabilitation preferences hardly differed between asthma and COPD patients. Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) as well as time since diagnosis were found to have a significant influence on patients' rehabilitation preferences.

conclusionsPatients in pulmonary rehabilitation have preferences regarding specific program components. To increase the adherence to, and thus, the effectiveness of rehabilitation programs, these results must be considered when developing or optimizing PR-programs.

Indexed as

AsthmaChoice-based conjoint analysisChronic obstructive pulmonary diseaseCOPDLatent class modelMixed-effects modelPatient preferencesPulmonary rehabilitation

Identifiers

PMID33866476
PMCPMC8053281
OpenAlexW3154293940

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.