Observational studyPloS one2024
Changes in lung function and dyspnea perception in Colombian Covid-19 patients after a 12-week pulmonary rehabilitation program.
Observational study in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlthough moderate and severe Covid-19 patients have shown obstructive and restrictive disorders in pulmonary function after recovery from the disease, studies evaluating the effectiveness of rehabilitation programs that seek to improve lung function are scarce.
aimHerein, we evaluate changes in lung function and perceived dyspnea in Covid-19 patients after undergoing 12 weeks of a pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) program.
designRetrospective observational study.
settingCesar, Colombia Neumocesar Pneumological Center. POPULATION: 100 outpatients with a history of Covid-19.
methodsRespiratory function using spirometry parameters, as well as perceived dyspnea, measured by the modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) dyspnea scale, was evaluated in 100 patients with a history of Covid-19. We used univariate and multivariate statistical approaches to assess changes in lung function and perceived dyspnea before and after a PR program to determine whether gender, age, height, weight, comorbidities, and oxygen delivery system affects the recovery of lung function and perceived dyspnea.
resultsIt was found that PR treatment has positive effects on respiratory pathologies caused by SARS-CoV-2 infection regardless of patient gender (S = 0,029), indicating that rehabilitation provided benefits regardless of the physical characteristics of the patients. Both univariate and multivariate statistical analyses indicated that FVC (P = 0,0001), FEV1(P = 0,0001), and mMRC (P = 0,0001) are robust diagnostic indicators of lung function recovery and perceived dyspnea. Both invasive and non-invasive positive pressure ventilatory support had deleterious effects on lung function prolongating patient recovery (P = 0,0001).
conclusionsRehabilitation programs can benefit patients facing respiratory pathologies caused by SARS-CoV-2 infection. Additional research on the long-term effects of the sequelae of Covid-19 is needed. CLINICAL REHABILITATION IMPACT: PR programs have positive effects on patients facing respiratory pathologies caused by SARS-CoV-2 infection.
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.