ArticleChronic respiratory disease
Assessment and management of frailty during pulmonary rehabilitation: An international survey of Australian and New Zealand clinicians.
Article in Chronic respiratory disease. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BackgroundFrailty is common among patients referred to pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) programs. While it is considered an independent predictor of program non-completion, people with frailty respond positively to PR. Clinicians' perspectives on assessing and managing frailty in PR has not been established. This study aimed to identify clinicians' current practices, perceptions, and opinions on assessing and managing frailty in people who attend PR in Australia and New Zealand.MethodsAn international online survey targeting healthcare professionals in Australia and New Zealand involved in PR programs using a combination of multiple-response closed-ended and open-ended questions. This survey study was reported in accordance with the Consensus-Based Checklist for Reporting of Survey Studies (CROSS).ResultsOf 103 responses, 89 healthcare professionals completed the survey (92.6% completion rate). Nineteen percent routinely assessed frailty, mostly using Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB). Respondents reported the main considerations for choice of frailty assessment tools were ease of use and cost. The most common frailty indicators identified by respondents included falls history, low body weight, slow or aided gait, and muscle weakness. Seventy-nine percent believed PR to be appropriate to manage frailty in this population, while 94% desired additional resources in future guidelines. Suggestions to improve PR to better manage frailty included reshaping rehabilitation program content, and providing specific patient education. Future desired research priorities included improvements to frailty assessment tools, frailty-specific guidelines and workforce training.ConclusionThis study explores PR practices among clinicians in Australia and New Zealand, showing variability in frailty assessment and management. It provides a foundation for evaluating key aspects of PR models that can be tailored to these clients' needs and limitations.
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.