Randomized controlled study on pulmonary rehabilitation in COVID-19 patients with pneumonia

Pulmonary rehabilitation in COVID-19 patients with pneumonia is associated with better treatment outcomes. However, existing protocols have never been evaluated in randomized control studies. The aim. To evaluate the effectiveness of newly-developed pulmonary rehabilitation protocol compared to basic Russian COVID-19 guidelines for patients with oxygenation index (OI) between 200 and 400 points without IMV. Methods. Based on literature reviews and own clinical experience, standard rehabilitation protocol was designed and tailored for specific needs of low-OI patients. Two clinical centers participated in the study and included total 73 patients in main group. Control group included 73 retrospective patients based in propensity score; this patients received standard protocol of early pneumonia activation from official COVID-19 guidelines. Ten-days clinical outcomes were assessed based on parameter distribution type. Results. Evidence show significant difference in required time of continuous oxygen support in (5.1 ± 3.3 vs 8.0 ± 4.6 days for main and control group respectively. Main group also had mildly better functional. We’ve observed less mortality in main group, but attribute it not to the program, but for growing experience of health professionals and decreased loads on health system. Malignancy as comorbidity was considered a significant cofactor also. Conclusion. New pulmonary rehabilitation protocol improves clinical outcomes in critical COVID-19 patients by decreasing the demand fox oxygen support.

1. World Health Organization. [Updated strategy of struggle with COVID-19. April 14, 2020]. Available at: https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/coronaviruse/covid19-strategy-update-2020-ru.pdf?sfvrsn=29da3ba0_19 (in Russian).

2. Zang K., Chen B., Wang M. et al. The effect of early mobilization in critically ill patients: A meta-analysis. Nurs. Crit. Care. [Preprint. Posted: 2019, Jun. 20]. DOI: 10.1111/nicc.12455.

3. Miri L., Wakrim L., Kassar H. et al. Impact of immigration on HIV-1 molecular epidemiology in West Africa, Maghreb and Southern Europe. AIDS Rev. 2014; 16 (2): 109–116.

4. Ekkekakis P., Lind E., Hall E.E., Petruzzello S.J. Can self-reported tolerance of exercise intensity play a role in exercise testing? Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 2007; 39 (7): 11931199. DOI: 10.1249/mss.0b013e318058a5ea.

5. Miller M.D., Paradis C.F., Houck P.R. et al. Rating chronic medical illness burden in geropsychiatric practice and research: application of the Cumulative Illness Rating Scale. Psychiatry Res. 1992; 41 (3): 237–248. DOI: 10.1016/01651781(92)90005-n.

6. Yang F., Liu N., Hu J.Y. et al. [Pulmonary rehabilitation guidelines in the principle of 4S for patients infected with 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV)]. Zhonghua Jie He He Hu Xi Za Zhi. 2020; 43 (3): 180–182. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1001-0939.2020.03.007 (in Chinese).

7. Liu K., Zhang W., Yang Y. et al. Respiratory rehabilitation in elderly patients with COVID-19: A randomized controlled study. Complement. Ther. Clin. Pract. 2020; 39: 101166. DOI: 10.1016/j.ctcp.2020.101166.

8. [Recommendations for respiratory rehabilitation of coronavirus disease 2019 in adult]. Zhonghua Jie He He Hu Xi Za Zhi. 2020; 43 (4): 308–314. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn11214720200228-00206 (in Chinese).

9. Feng F., Tuchman S., Denninger J.W. et al. Qigong for the prevention, treatment, and rehabilitation of COVID-19 infection in older adults. Am. J. Geriatr. Psychiatry. 2020; 28 (8): 812–819. DOI: 10.1016/j.jagp.2020.05.012.

10. Iannaccone S., Castellazzi P., Tettamanti A. et al. Role of rehabilitation department for adult individuals with COVID19: The experience of the San Raffaele hospital of Milan. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 2020; 101 (9): 1656–1661. DOI: 10.1016/j.apmr.2020.05.015.

11. Zhao H.M., Xie Y.X., Wang C. Recommendations for respiratory rehabilitation in adults with coronavirus disease 2019. Chin. Med. J. 2020; 133 (13): 1595–1602. DOI: 10.1097/cm9.0000000000000848.

12. Meshcheryakova N.N. [Principles of pulmonary rehabilitation in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease]. Atmosfera: pul’monologiya i allergologiya. 2013; (2): 27–31 (in Russian).

13. Patel R., Park J., Shah A., Saif M.W. COVID-19 and cancer patients. Cancer Med. J. 2020; 3 (1): 40–48.

14. Zhang, J., Wang X., Jia X. et al. Risk factors for disease severity, unimprovement, and mortality in COVID-19 patients in Wuhan, China. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. 2020; 26 (6): 767–772. DOI: 10.1016/j.cmi.2020.04.012.

15. Tadic M., Cuspidi C., Sala C. COVID-19 and diabetes: Is there enough evidence? J. Clin. Hypertens. 2020; 22 (6): 943–948. DOI: 10.1111/jch.13912.

16. Lorente-Ros A., Monteagudo Ruiz J.M., Rincón L.M. et al. Myocardial injury determination improves risk stratification and predicts mortality in COVID-19 patients. Cardiol. J. [Preprint. Posted: 2020, Jun. 26]. DOI: 10.5603/cj.a2020.0089.

17. Leung C. Risk factors for predicting mortality in elderly patients with COVID-19: A review of clinical data in China. Mech. Ageing. Dev. 2020; 188: 111255. DOI: 10.1016/j.mad.2020.111255.

18. Ji D., Zhang D., Xu J. et al. Prediction for progression risk in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia: the CALL Score. Clin. Infect. Dis. 2020; 71 (6): 1393–1399. DOI: 10.1093/cid/ciaa414.

19. Iavarone M., D’Ambrosio R., Lampertico P. High rates of 30-day mortality in patients with cirrhosis and COVID-19. J. Hepatol. [Preprint. Posted: 2020, Aug. 06]. DOI: 10.1016/j.jhep.2020.08.001.

20. Hu H., Yao N., Qiu Y. Comparing rapid scoring systems in mortality prediction of critically Ill patients with novel coronavirus disease. Acad. Emerg. Med. 2020; 27 (6): 461–468.

21. Bello-Chavolla O.Y., González-Díaz A., Antonio-Villa N.E. et al. Unequal impact of structural health determinants and comorbidity on COVID-19 severity and lethality in older mexican adults: Considerations beyond chronological aging. J. Gerontol. A. Biol. Sci. Med. Sci. 2020: glaa 163. [Preprint. Posted: 2020, Jun. 29]. DOI: 10.1093/gerona/glaa163.