Breathing exercises versus strength exercises through telerehabilitation in coronavirus disease 2019 patients in the acute phase: A randomized controlled trial
Breathing exercises versus strength exercises through telerehabilitation in coronavirus disease 2019 patients in the acute phase: A randomized controlled trial
复制标题
DOI：
10.1177/02692155211061221
复制
发表时间：
2021-11-16
影响因子：
3
通讯作者：
Jose Gonzalez-Gerez, Juan
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Rodriguez-Blanco, Cleofas;Bernal-Utrera, Carlos;Jose Gonzalez-Gerez, Juan
目的比较2019年冠状病毒病患者通过远程康复的两种不同运动方案的效果。设计随机、对照、平行、双盲、三组临床试验。通过远程康复设备为患者建立家庭。受试者2019年冠状病毒病急性期受试者。干预受试者被分为三组：呼吸练习组、力量练习组或无治疗/对照组。主要测量指标：在基线和14天后分析疲劳视觉模拟量表、6分钟步行试验、30秒坐立试验、多维呼吸困难-12问卷和博格量表。结果93例受试者中，88例入组，77例患者（平均[SD]年龄39.40 [11.71]）完成了14 d的干预并纳入分析：力量训练组26例，呼吸训练组29例，对照组22例。组间分析显示，研究组与对照组在所有变量上均存在显著性差异（p < 0.05）;博格量表，多维呼吸困难-12问卷（干预前后评分：力量锻炼组：7.85 [6.82]~ 4.54[4.82]，呼吸锻炼组：11.04 [6.49]~ 5.32 [3.63]，对照组：10.27 [6.49] - 10.59[6.58]），疲劳视觉模拟量表，6分钟步行试验和30秒坐立试验（干预前后评分：力量训练组：12.19 [4.42] - 13.58 [5.37]，呼吸训练组：11.18 [3.42] - 12.79 [4.00]，对照组：10.45 [2.15] - 9.86[1.88]）。变量博格量表（R-2 = 0.548）和多维呼吸困难-12问卷（R-2 = 0.475）的效应量最大。结论与对照组相比，力量训练组和呼吸训练组在疲劳、呼吸困难、自觉努力和身体状态方面均获得了显著改善，但呼吸训练组在呼吸困难和有氧能力方面的益处最大。
Objective To compare the effectiveness of two different exercise-based programs through telerehabilitation in patients with coronavirus disease 2019. Design Randomized, controlled, parallel, double-blinded, three-arm clinical trial. Setting Patients' homes through telerehabilitation devices. Subjects Subjects with coronavirus disease 2019 in the acute phase. Interventions Subjects were divided into three groups: breathing exercises group, strength exercises group or no treatment/control group. Main measures We analysed visual analogue scale for fatigue, 6-minute walking test, 30-seconds sit-to-stand test, multidimensional dyspnoea-12 questionnaire and Borg scale at baseline and 14 days later. Results From 93 subjects recruited, 88 were enrolled, and 77 patients (mean [SD] age 39.40 [11.71]) completed the 14-days intervention and were included in the analysis: 26 in strength exercises group, 29 in breathing exercises group and 22 in control group. The intergroup analysis shows significant differences between the study groups and control group in all variables (p < 0.05); Borg scale, multidimensional dyspnoea-12 questionnaire (pre-post intervention score: strength exercises group: 7.85 [6.82] - 4.54[4.82], breathing exercises group: 11.04 [6.49] - 5.32 [3.63], control group: 10.27 [6.49] - 10.59[6.58]), visual analogue scale for fatigue, 6-minute walking test and 30-seconds sit-to-stand test (pre-post intervention score: strength exercises group: 12.19 [4.42] - 13.58 [5.37], breathing exercises group: 11.18 [3.42] - 12.79 [4.00], control group: 10.45 [2.15] - 9.86[1.88]). The greatest effect sizes were found in the variables Borg Scale (R-2 = 0.548) and multidimensional dyspnoea-12 questionnaire (R-2 = 0.475). Conclusions Strength exercises group and breathing exercises group obtained significant improvements in fatigue, dyspnoea, perceived effort, and physical state, compared to control group, although the greatest benefits were found for dyspnoea and aerobic capacity in breathing exercises group.