Oo Hnin H, Elsankary Osama, Wilcox Diahann K, Kaur Antarpreet, Reardon Jane Z, Soriano Jose A, Datta Debapriya, ZuWallack Richard
Department of Pulmonary, Critical Care and Sleep Medicine, University of Connecticut, Farmington, CT 06030, USA.
Frank H. Netter School of Medicine, Quinnipiac University, North Haven, CT 06473, USA.
J Clin Med. 2025 Apr 22;14(9):2863. doi: 10.3390/jcm14092863.
: Despite documented benefits across multiple outcome areas, referral and uptake into pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) following discharge after an exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is low in many health care systems. Surveys documenting this underutilization may ignore the fact of disease severity or comorbidity severe enough to make many patients ineligible based on accepted selection criteria for the intervention. The aim of this study was to evaluate the magnitude of non-eligibility for PR following discharge after a COPD exacerbation. : Medical records of COPD patients discharged over a one-year period in two hospitals were reviewed. Records from 353 patients discharged home were reviewed by six clinicians with experience in respiratory medicine and/or PR, three at each hospital. : The mean age of the total sample was 71 ± 12 years; 53% were female. Full concordance (all three reviewers agreed on the eligibility or non-eligibility of each patient) was 73%. Our eligibility criterion (two of three reviewers agreed) for PR was 39%. Categories (%) of non-eligibility criteria included the severity of medical condition(s) (44%), cognitive problems, psychiatric disease or substance abuse (24%), incorrect diagnosis (18%), institutionalized post-discharge (9%), and language barriers (4%) (patients may have been placed into more than one criteria category). : Our study indicates that a majority of patients with clinical diagnoses of COPD discharged following exacerbations may not be appropriate referrals to PR based on accepted inclusion and/or exclusion criteria for the intervention. However, even after taking this into account, PR uptake is still critically underutilized.
尽管在多个结果领域都有已记录的益处,但在许多医疗保健系统中,慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)急性加重出院后转介至肺康复(PR)并接受治疗的比例较低。记录这种未充分利用情况的调查可能忽略了疾病严重程度或合并症严重到足以使许多患者根据该干预措施公认的选择标准而不符合条件这一事实。本研究的目的是评估COPD急性加重出院后不符合PR条件的比例。
对两家医院在一年期间出院的COPD患者的病历进行了审查。来自353名出院回家患者的病历由六名有呼吸医学和/或PR经验的临床医生进行审查,每家医院三名。
总样本的平均年龄为71±12岁;53%为女性。完全一致(所有三位审查者对每位患者的合格或不合格达成一致)率为73%。我们的PR合格标准(三位审查者中有两位达成一致)为39%。不符合标准的类别(%)包括病情严重程度(44%)、认知问题、精神疾病或药物滥用(24%)、诊断错误(18%)、出院后入住机构(9%)和语言障碍(4%)(患者可能被归入不止一个标准类别)。
我们的研究表明,根据该干预措施公认的纳入和/或排除标准,大多数COPD急性加重后出院的临床诊断患者可能不适合转介至PR。然而,即使考虑到这一点,PR的接受率仍然严重未得到充分利用。