4.4 Article

Pulmonary Rehabilitation in Patients with Pulmonary Sarcoidosis: Impact on Exercise Capacity and Fatigue

Journal

RESPIRATION
Volume 99, Issue 4, Pages 289-297

Publisher

KARGER
DOI: 10.1159/000506295

Keywords

Sarcoidosis; Exercise training; Pulmonary rehabilitation; Cardiopulmonary exercise test; Fatigue

Funding

  1. Norwegian ExtraFoundation for Health and Rehabilitation [2016/FO76163]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: There is limited evidence regarding the impact of multidisciplinary pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) on exercise capacity and fatigue in patients with pulmonary sarcoidosis. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact on exercise capacity and fatigue following PR, and to examine whether baseline fatigue was related to change in peak oxygen uptake (Delta V?O-2peak). Methods: Forty-one patients with pulmonary sarcoidosis attending a 4-week inpatient PR program were recruited to this pre-post study. Both maximal exercise capacity, defined as V?O-2peak and measured with a cardiopulmonary exercise test, and fatigue, assessed with the Fatigue Assessment Scale (score 10-50 points), were measured before and after PR. Results: There was a statistically significant improvement in V?O-2peak (1.2 +/- 2.3 mL/kg/min, p = 0.002), and fatigue decreased significantly (-1.7 +/- 3.9 points, p = 0.009) following PR. Unadjusted linear regression analyses demonstrated that age (B = -0.076, p = 0.017) and baseline fatigue (B = 0.196, p = 0.001) were predictors for change in V?O-2peak, while in adjusted analyses (age, sex, baseline V?O-2peak, baseline fatigue, and diffusion capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide), only baseline fatigue predicted change in V?O-2peak following PR (B = 0.165, p = 0.026). Conclusion: A 4-week multidisciplinary PR program improves maximal exercise capacity and reduces fatigue in patients with pulmonary sarcoidosis. Baseline fatigue only partly predicted change in V?O-2peak following PR.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available