Interventions to increase referral and uptake to pulmonary rehabilitation in people with COPD: a systematic review.
View / Open Files
Publication Date
2018Journal Title
Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis
ISSN
1176-9106
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Volume
13
Pages
3571-3586
Language
eng
Type
Article
This Version
VoR
Physical Medium
Electronic-eCollection
Metadata
Show full item recordCitation
Early, F., Wellwood, I., Kuhn, I., Deaton, C., & Fuld, J. (2018). Interventions to increase referral and uptake to pulmonary rehabilitation in people with COPD: a systematic review.. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis, 13 3571-3586. https://doi.org/10.2147/COPD.S172239
Abstract
Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) reduces the number and duration of hospital admissions and readmissions, and improves health-related quality of life in patients with COPD. Despite clinical guideline recommendations, under-referral and limited uptake to PR contribute to poor treatment access. We reviewed published literature on the effectiveness of interventions to improve referral to and uptake of PR in patients with COPD when compared to standard care, alternative interventions, or no intervention. The review followed recognized methods. Search terms included "pulmonary rehabilitation" AND "referral" OR "uptake" applied to MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, ASSIA, BNI, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library up to January 2018. Titles, abstracts, and full papers were reviewed independently and quality appraised. The protocol was registered (PROSPERO # 2016:CRD42016043762). We screened 5,328 references. Fourteen papers met the inclusion criteria. Ten assessed referral and five assessed uptake (46,146 patients, 409 clinicians, 82 hospital departments, 122 general practices). One was a systematic review which assessed uptake. Designs, interventions, and scope of studies were diverse, often part of multifaceted evidence-based management of COPD. Examples included computer-based prompts at practice nurse review, patient information, clinician education, and financial incentives. Four studies reported statistically significant improvements in referral (range 3.5%-36%). Two studies reported statistically significant increases in uptake (range 18%-21.5%). Most studies had methodological and reporting limitations. Meta-analysis was not conducted due to heterogeneity of study designs. This review demonstrates the range of approaches aimed at increasing referral and uptake to PR but identifies limited evidence of effectiveness due to the heterogeneity and limitations of study designs. Research using robust methods with clear descriptions of intervention, setting, and target population is required to optimize access to PR across a range of settings.
Keywords
access to healthcare, evidence-based practice, health services research, long-term condition, service improvement, supervised exercise, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Attitude of Health Personnel, Education, Medical, Continuing, Exercise Therapy, Female, Health Services Research, Humans, Inservice Training, Lung, Male, Middle Aged, Patient Education as Topic, Physician Incentive Plans, Practice Patterns, Physicians', Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive, Recovery of Function, Referral and Consultation, Reminder Systems, Treatment Outcome
Sponsorship
Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (CUH) (rfpb pb-pg-1215-20034)
Identifiers
External DOI: https://doi.org/10.2147/COPD.S172239
This record's URL: https://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/handle/1810/287071
Rights
Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International
Licence URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
Statistics
Total file downloads (since January 2020). For more information on metrics see the
IRUS guide.
Recommended or similar items
The current recommendation prototype on the Apollo Repository will be turned off on 03 February 2023. Although the pilot has been fruitful for both parties, the service provider IKVA is focusing on horizon scanning products and so the recommender service can no longer be supported. We recognise the importance of recommender services in supporting research discovery and are evaluating offerings from other service providers. If you would like to offer feedback on this decision please contact us on: support@repository.cam.ac.uk