Pulmonary rehabilitation completion (≥33 sessions) significantly improved global quality of life scores from 65.36 to 72.67 (p<0.0001), whereas non-completion or no participation worsened scores.
Observational (n=183)
No
Does pulmonary rehabilitation improve quality of life in patients with pulmonary hypertension?
Pulmonary rehabilitation significantly improves physical, mental, and global quality of life scores in patients with pulmonary hypertension when adherence is high.
p-value: p=<0.0001
Abstract Introduction Pulmonary hypertension (PH) is a chronic progressive disease in which patients suffer from dyspnea and fatigue, increasing inactivity and physical deconditioning that compromises functional capacity and quality of life (QoL). Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) might improve symptoms and thus, QoL; however, evidence supporting this intervention is limited. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of a 48 session PR program on the QoL of patients with PH. Methods and Results A retrospective analysis of 183 stable patients attended between 2021 and 2024 in a pneumology specialized center in Colombia (median age 59 years range18 to 97 years, 75,4% female) with PH and functional class (FC) I to IV was undertaken to evaluate the outcome of different types of PR (in-person, virtual and hybrid) on QoL measured by physical summary component (PSC), mental summary component (MCS) and global scores of the SF-12 questionnaire. Complete PR was defined as completing 33 sessions or more over a 12-month period, and significant improvement was considered if there was a change of at least 5 points in any of the three SF-12 scores. 36,1% of the studied population completed 33 sessions or more, 21,3% did less than 33 and 42,6% didn’t participate at all. Patients who completed PR significantly improved global (65,36±1,86 to 72,67±1,76; p 0,0001), mental (72,36±17,6 to 80,3±15,75; p = 0,0002) and physical scores (55 IQR 40-70 to 65 55-70; p 0,0001), while subjects that didn’t complete or didn’t do PR had reduction of the three scores: global (62,17±1,66 to 57,06±1,82; p = 0,0002), MCS (68,99±19,99 a 64,2±21,31; p = 0,0031) and PCS (55 40-70 to 45 20-65; p = 0,0008). Virtual and hybrid PR didn’t have significant differences over the effect on either of the QoL scores compared to in-person PR. A multivariate analysis was done, showing a 0,23±0,13 (global), 0,17±0,14 (MCS) and 0,25±0,12 (PCS) point increase for each PR session. Conclusion PR as add-on therapy for patients with PH may be effective to improve QoL if patients have good adherence to therapy. Moreover, there were no differences in its impact on QoL scores with distinct PR modalities (in-person, virtual and hybrid) in this study. Further multicentric randomized controlled studies are needed to confirm these promising results. This abstract is funded by: None
Gonzalez et al. (Fri,) conducted a observational in Pulmonary hypertension (n=183). Pulmonary rehabilitation vs. Incomplete (<33 sessions) or no pulmonary rehabilitation was evaluated on Quality of life measured by global, mental, and physical scores of the SF-12 questionnaire (p=<0.0001). Pulmonary rehabilitation completion (≥33 sessions) significantly improved global quality of life scores from 65.36 to 72.67 (p<0.0001), whereas non-completion or no participation worsened scores.