A systematic review of the content and delivery of education in pulmonary rehabilitation programmes. (December 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Roberts, N.J.; Kidd, L.; Kirkwood, K.; Cross, J.; Partridge, M.R.
• Is Part Of: Respiratory medicine. Volume 145(2018)
• Page Start: 161
• Page End: 181
• Publication Date: 2018-12
• Subjects: Pulmonary rehabilitation -- Education -- Patient-centred care -- Respiratory disease -- Delivery of care; Chest -- Diseases -- Periodicals; Chest -- Diseases -- Great Britain -- Periodicals; Respiratory organs -- Diseases -- Periodicals; Respiratory Tract Diseases -- Periodicals; Appareil respiratoire -- Maladies -- Périodiques; Thorax -- Maladies -- Périodiques; Appareil respiratoire -- Maladies -- Traitement -- Périodiques; Electronic journals; 616.2
• DOI: 10.1016/j.rmed.2018.11.002
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0954-6111

Abstract

Abstract: Introduction: Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) is a core component of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) management with well recognized benefits. While suggestions for educational content within pulmonary rehabilitation have been detailed in clinical guidance, it is unclear what educational content is delivered as part of pulmonary rehabilitation, who delivers it, and how it is delivered. Methods: A systematic review was conducted to identify what educational content is delivered as part of pulmonary rehabilitation, how is this delivered and who delivers it. Databases were searched from 1981 to 2017 using multiple search terms related to "pulmonary rehabilitation" and "education". Results: Fourteen studies were identified. This included 6 survey studies, 5 quasi-experimental studies and 3 RCTs. Five key topics that were consistently included within PR programmes were identified as: 1) Anxiety/depression and stress management. 2) Early recognition of signs of infection. 3) Dyspnea and symptom management. 4) Nutrition. 5) Techniques using inhalers and nebulizers. Broader topics such as welfare/benefits, sexuality, and advance care directives did not frequently feature. Only four studies used tools to measure knowledge or learning pre and post rehabilitation in an attempt to evaluate the effectiveness of the education delivered as part of PR. Conclusions: The delivery of education in PR programmes is variable and does not follow suggested educational topics. Education needs to take a patient centered motivational approach to ensure effective delivery. Further research into appropriate educational outcome measures are needed, in order to evaluate the changes in behaviour associated with education. Highlights: Pulmonary rehabilitation is an effective intervention which improves outcomes in COPD. This systematic review has shown that delivery of education in pulmonary rehabilitation is often poorly described in published papers. The delivery of education in pulmonary rehabilitation is variable and often does not cover suggested topic areas. Education needs to take a patient centered motivational approach to ensure effective delivery. Appropriate educational outcome measures are needed to evaluate changes in behaviour before and after pulmonary rehabilitation.