Response to pulmonary rehabilitation: toward personalised programmes?

Clinical practice should be based on the best scientific evidence, which does not always correspond to evidence-based medicine, involving guidelines, meta-analyses and protocols as a basis for clinical approach [1, 2]. There is no need of further randomised controlled trials (RCTs) for evidence that...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The European respiratory journal 2015-12, Vol.46 (6), p.1538-1540
Hauptverfasser: Ambrosino, Nicolino, Clini, Enrico M
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Clinical practice should be based on the best scientific evidence, which does not always correspond to evidence-based medicine, involving guidelines, meta-analyses and protocols as a basis for clinical approach [1, 2]. There is no need of further randomised controlled trials (RCTs) for evidence that pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) improves daily symptoms, exercise performance and health status in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), independently of disease stage and complexity [3]. Although the direct demonstration of a clear benefit in survival is lacking (as is also true for most therapies used in COPD), PR is well recognised as a fundamental part of the integrated care of these patients and it has been incorporated in most guidelines for their management [4].
ISSN:0903-1936
1399-3003
DOI:10.1183/13993003.01125-2015