Trial reportInternational journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease2023
The Impact of Patient Preference on Attendance and Completion Rates at Centre-Based and mHealth Pulmonary Rehabilitation: A Non-Inferiority Pragmatic Clinical Trial.
Trial report in International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Experiences of Home-Based Pulmonary Rehabilitation With mHealth and Centre-Based Pulmonary Rehabilitation in People With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Qualitative Study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025Trial
- Reframing Rehabilitation Retention in Long-Term Conditions: A Theory-Informed Mini-Review of Psychological Adaptation and Engagement.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Telerehabilitation Interventions That Improve Adherence to Pulmonary Rehabilitation in Patients With Chronic Respiratory Diseases: A Realist Review.Journal of clinical nursing · 2026Review
- Comparison of Center-Based and Tele-Cardiac Rehabilitation in Coronary Artery Disease: Effects on Functional Capacity, QoL, and Kinesiophobia.Annals of rehabilitation medicine · 2025Article
- Safety and Feasibility of a Two-Way Audiovisual Teleconferenced Pulmonary Rehabilitation Program.CHEST pulmonary · 2025Article
- Feasibility, Usability, and Pilot Efficacy Study of a Software-Enabled, Virtual Pulmonary Rehabilitation with Remote Therapeutic Monitoring.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2025Article
- Using Remote Technology to Engage Patients with Interstitial Lung Diseases in a Home Exercise Program: A Pilot Study.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Article
- The characteristics of people with COPD who enrol in home-based pulmonary rehabilitation versus centre-based pulmonary rehabilitation: A nationwide cross-sectional study.Chronic respiratory diseaseArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) is vital in the management of chronic respiratory disorders (CRDs) although uptake, attendance and completion are poor. Differing models of delivering PR are emerging in an attempt to increase the uptake and completion of this intervention. This study aimed to evaluate participant rate of attendance and completion of PR when given a preference regarding model of delivery (centre-based and mPR). Secondary aims were to evaluate the factors affecting patient preference for model of delivery and determine whether mPR is non-inferior to centre-based PR in health outcomes. Methods: A multi-centre non-inferiority preference based clinical trial in Auckland, New Zealand. Participants with a CRD referred for PR were offered the choice of centre-based or mHealth PR (mPR). The primary outcome was completion rate of chosen intervention. Results: A total of 105 participants were recruited to the study with 67 (64%) preferring centre-based and 38 (36%) mPR. The odds of completing the PR programme were higher in the centre-based group compared to mPR (odds ratio 1.90 95% CI [0.83-4.35]). Participants opting for mPR were significantly younger (p = 0.002) and significantly more likely to be working (p = 0.0001). Results showed that mPR was not inferior to centre-based regarding changes in symptom scores (CAT) or time spent in sedentary behaviour (SBQ). When services were forced to transition to telehealth services during COVID-19 restrictions, the attendance and completion rates were higher with telephone calls and video conferencing compared to mPR - suggesting that synchronous interpersonal interactions with clinicians may facilitate the best attendance and completion rates. Conclusion: When offered the choice of PR delivery method, the majority of participants preferred centre-based PR and this facilitated the best completion rates. mPR was the preferred choice for younger, working participants suggesting that mPR may offer a viable alternative to centre-based PR for some participants, especially younger, employed participants.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.