ArticleInternational journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease2026
Perceived Acceptability of SPACE for COPD© as a Maintenance Option Following Pulmonary Rehabilitation Discharge: A Qualitative Interview Study with Patients and Facilitators Using Framework Analysis.
Article in International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, 2026. 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
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Following completion of Pulmonary Rehabilitation (PR), the biopsychosocial benefits often decline. PR maintenance is recommended to extend the benefits; however, detail lacks on what this should entail. SPACE for COPD© is a light touch, evidenced-based self-management intervention which we tested as a maintenance strategy during the COVID-19 pandemic. We explored the acceptability of SPACE for COPD© as a maintenance option following PR for both patients and facilitators using qualitative research methods. Methods: We conducted semi-structured interviews and focus groups with patients and intervention facilitators involved in the SPACE for COPD© maintenance study. These were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using Framework Analysis. Results: Seventeen patients were interviewed; 13 (76.5%) of which were programme completers: five (29.4%) received a group-based intervention, four (23.5%) received one-to-one, and eight (47.1%) received hybrid. Two focus groups were conducted with eight facilitators; six (75%) were physiotherapists, one (12.5%) was a nurse, and one (12.5%) was a health psychologist. Analysis generated six themes: (1) the changing structure of maintenance SPACE for COPD©; (2) the integral role of the facilitator; (3) engagement with the manual required time and commitment from patients; (4) staying active on maintenance SPACE for COPD© was facilitated by goal setting and exercise; (5) biopsychosocial outcomes of maintenance SPACE for COPD©; and (6) the future of maintenance SPACE for COPD©. Conclusion: Maintenance SPACE for COPD© was acceptable and could be implemented into the PR healthcare pathway during the COVID-19 pandemic. It helped patients to adopt and integrate new exercise habits if they could adapt and personalise these to their home lives. Adaptions made during the COVID-19 pandemic created a menu of options. Building upon this personalisation is required to ensure the intervention is accessible and patient-centred.
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.