Performance-based criteria are used in participant selection for pulmonary rehabilitation programs
James R. Walsh A B E , Zoe J. McKeough C , Norman R. Morris A D and Jenny D. Paratz BA Queensland Lung Transplant Service, Physiotherapy Department, The Prince Charles Hospital, Rode Road, Chermside, Qld 4032, Australia.
B Anaesthesiology and Critical Care and the Burns, Trauma and Critical Care Research Centre, School of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Qld 4072, Australia. Email: j.paratz@uq.edu.au
C Discipline of Physiotherapy, Faculty of Health Sciences, The University of Sydney, NSW 2141, Australia. Email: zoe.mckeough@sydney.edu.au
D School of Physiotherapy and Exercise Science and Griffith Health Institute, Griffith University, Qld 4215, Australia. Email: n.morris@griffith.edu.au
E Corresponding author. Email: james_walsh@health.qld.gov.au
Australian Health Review 37(3) 331-336 https://doi.org/10.1071/AH12192
Submitted: 19 June 2012 Accepted: 12 November 2012 Published: 22 April 2013
Abstract
Objective To determine the participant entry criteria used by Australian-based pulmonary rehabilitation programs and the factors that influence selection.
Methods This cross-sectional observational study invited all program coordinators listed on the Australian Lung Foundation’s pulmonary rehabilitation database in November 2009.
Results The response rate was 40.5% (79/195), with 58% of respondents reporting a waiting list. Forty respondents reported prioritising referrals due to: disease severity (75%), requirement for medical procedure (70%), upon medical request (60%) or participant’s likelihood to benefit (55%). Fifty-eight respondents reported using entry criteria to select participants, which was mainly for safety reasons and performance-based expectations. All 58 respondents used at least one exclusion criterion in selecting their participants, compared with only 25 programs using inclusion criteria. Increased demand on individual programs was related to prioritising referrals (P < 0.001) and was reported by 12 programs as a reason for using participant entry criteria.
Conclusions Program coordinators commonly prioritise referrals and use participant entry criteria to manage clinical demand with performance-based expectations an important consideration. The inclusion criteria that identify participants more likely to benefit from pulmonary rehabilitation are less commonly used in the performance-based selections.
What is known about the topic? Pulmonary rehabilitation is an essential component of chronic lung disease management due to the high-quality evidence demonstrating that these programs can improve participants’ exercise capacity, dyspnea and quality of life. However, access to pulmonary rehabilitation is severely limited in Australia with <1% of individuals with moderate to severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease able to participate in these programs each year. Prior to the present study it was unknown how Australian pulmonary rehabilitation coordinators manage this demand on their programs.
What does this paper add? Program coordinators commonly prioritise referrals and use participant entry criteria to select participants, with performance-based expectations an important consideration. Although higher demand and waiting list pressure appear to influence these performance-based considerations, programs do not report using the existing evidence identifying responders to pulmonary rehabilitation in selecting participants for program inclusion. This finding is a reflection of the inadequate evidence identifying which individuals are more likely to benefit from pulmonary rehabilitation.
What are the implications for practitioners? With the current healthcare resources in Australia, pulmonary rehabilitation programs cannot meet the burden of all people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Therefore the selection of participants considered most likely to benefit from pulmonary rehabilitation programs will continue to occur. Better criteria are needed to improve participant selection to ensure timely access to individuals that are most likely to benefit from pulmonary rehabilitation.
References
[1] Nici L, Donner C, Wouters E, Zuwallack R, Ambrosino N, Bourbeau J, et al American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society statement on pulmonary rehabilitation. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2006; 173 1390–413.| American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society statement on pulmonary rehabilitation.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 16760357PubMed |
[2] Troosters T, Gosselink R, Decramer M. Short- and long-term effects of outpatient rehabilitation in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a randomized trial. Am J Med 2000; 109 207–12.
| Short- and long-term effects of outpatient rehabilitation in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a randomized trial.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BD3cvnsFeqsQ%3D%3D&md5=65273fdea3497ba0c6df0cbf1bcec5f9CAS | 10974183PubMed |
[3] Ries AL, Bauldoff GS, Carlin BW, Casaburi R, Emery CF, Mahler DA, et al Pulmonary rehabilitation: joint ACCP/AACVPR evidence-based clinical practice guidelines. Chest 2007; 131 4S–42S.
| Pulmonary rehabilitation: joint ACCP/AACVPR evidence-based clinical practice guidelines.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 17494825PubMed |
[4] Alison J, Barrack C, Cafarella P, Frith P, Hanna C, Hill C, et al. The pulmonary rehabilitation toolkit. The Australian Lung Foundation; 2009. Available at http://www.pulmonaryrehab.com.au/welcome.asp [verified May 2012].
[5] Frith P, Alison J, Burdon J, McKenzie D, Markos J, Peters M, et al. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The Australian Lung Foundation; 2001. Available at http://www.lungfoundation.com.au/images/stories/docs/COPD_Case_Statement-web-small.pdf [verified May 2012].
[6] Landry MD, Hamdan E, Al Mazeedi S, Brooks D. The precarious balance between ‘supply’ and ‘demand’ for health care: the increasing global demand for rehabilitation service for individuals living with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis 2008; 3 393–6.
| 18990966PubMed |
[7] Access Economic. Economic impact of COPD and cost effective solutions. Report. Australian Lung Foundation; 2008. Available at http://www.lungfoundation.com.au/lung-information/publications/economic-impact-of-copd-2008 [verified February 2010].
[8] Johnston CL, Maxwell LJ, Alison JA. Pulmonary rehabilitation in Australia: a national survey. Physiotherapy 2011; 97 284–90.
| Pulmonary rehabilitation in Australia: a national survey.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 22051584PubMed |
[9] Stollznow Research & Insights Advisory. Market research report pulmonary rehabilitation survey, July 2007. Australian Lung Foundation; 2008. Available at http://www.lungfoundation.com.au/lung-information/publications/pulmonary-rehabilitation-survey-results-2007 [verified December 2007].
[10] Brooks D, Sottana R, Bell B, Hanna M, Laframboise L, Selvanayagarajah S, et al Characterization of pulmonary rehabilitation programs in Canada in 2005. Can Respir J 2007; 14 87–92.
| 17372635PubMed |
[11] O’Neill B, Elborn J, MacMahon J, Bradley JM. Pulmonary rehabilitation and follow-on services: a Northern Ireland survey. Chron Respir Dis 2008; 5 149–54.
| Pulmonary rehabilitation and follow-on services: a Northern Ireland survey.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BD1crgt1yksg%3D%3D&md5=7e2b1002219bde09b2bcfdd95a24a572CAS | 18684790PubMed |
[12] Yohannes A, Stone R, Lowe D, Pursey N, Buckingham R, Roberts C. Pulmonary rehabilitation in the United Kingdom. Chron Respir Dis 2011; 8 193–9.
| Pulmonary rehabilitation in the United Kingdom.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 21724662PubMed |
[13] Bickford LS, Hodgkin JE, McInturff SL. National pulmonary rehabilitation survey. Update. J Cardiopulm Rehabil 1995; 15 406–11.
| National pulmonary rehabilitation survey. Update.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DyaK287pt1OhtA%3D%3D&md5=4e9a688ea25f1631d6d4ff7c5ba01e30CAS | 8624965PubMed |
[14] Vagaggini B, Costa F, Antonelli S, De Simone C, De Cusatis G, Martino F, et al Clinical predictors of the efficacy of a pulmonary rehabilitation programme in patients with COPD. Respir Med 2009; 103 1224–30.
| Clinical predictors of the efficacy of a pulmonary rehabilitation programme in patients with COPD.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 19304473PubMed |
[15] Troosters T, Gosselink R, Decramer M. Exercise training in COPD: how to distinguish responders from nonresponders. J Cardiopulm Rehabil 2001; 21 10–7.
| Exercise training in COPD: how to distinguish responders from nonresponders.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BD3M7ntFamtA%3D%3D&md5=cd65d5a5575adbe564feb0d9fbf39231CAS | 11271652PubMed |
[16] Young P, Dewse M, Fergusson W, Kolbe J. Respiratory rehabilitation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: predictors of nonadherence. Eur Respir J 1999; 13 855–9.
| Respiratory rehabilitation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: predictors of nonadherence.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DyaK1M3ovVyquw%3D%3D&md5=8bf26743d5ce4a42d621ce39ea15ad3fCAS | 10362053PubMed |
[17] Garrod R, Marshall J, Barley E, Jones PW. Predictors of success and failure in pulmonary rehabilitation. Eur Respir J 2006; 27 788–94.
| Predictors of success and failure in pulmonary rehabilitation.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BD287oslWkug%3D%3D&md5=a98eee658aee04412a2a3b511ce81b4aCAS | 16481381PubMed |
[18] Garrod R, Malerba M, Crisafulli E. Determinants of success. Eur Respir J 2011; 38 1215–8.
| Determinants of success.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BC3MblvVaqug%3D%3D&md5=6151fe7894ed41955b2af59e098ed1deCAS | 22045787PubMed |
[19] Evans RA, Singh SJ, Collier R, Williams JE, Morgan MD. Pulmonary rehabilitation is successful for COPD irrespective of MRC dyspnoea grade. Respir Med 2009; 103 1070–5.
| Pulmonary rehabilitation is successful for COPD irrespective of MRC dyspnoea grade.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BD1MvhsFGgtA%3D%3D&md5=95b5df759762a9d5b4d4df9ff390597fCAS | 19217765PubMed |
[20] Gerald LB, Sanderson B, Redden D, Bailey WC. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease stage and 6-minute walk outcome. J Cardiopulm Rehabil 2001; 21 296–9.
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease stage and 6-minute walk outcome.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BD3MrktlWjtQ%3D%3D&md5=8aa687080c866cb2221bbaabf6052b07CAS | 11591044PubMed |
[21] Crisafulli E, Costi S, Luppi F, Cirelli G, Cilione C, Coletti O, et al Role of comorbidities in a cohort of patients with COPD undergoing pulmonary rehabilitation. Thorax 2008; 63 487–92.
| Role of comorbidities in a cohort of patients with COPD undergoing pulmonary rehabilitation.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BD1czksFOltg%3D%3D&md5=3ed10a7f4cfa0415ea9ebefa7b75f2c3CAS | 18203818PubMed |
