Ignite Creation Date:
2025-12-25 @ 1:21 AM
Ignite Modification Date:
2026-01-03 @ 9:32 AM
Study NCT ID:
NCT02161393
Status:
COMPLETED
Last Update Posted:
2017-08-25
First Post:
2013-05-28
Is NOT Gene Therapy:
True
Has Adverse Events:
False
Brief Title:
Physical Activity Versus Pulmonary Rehabilitation in COPD
Sponsor:
University of Ulster
Organization:
Study Overview
Official Title:
PhysicaL actIvity interVention vErsus puLmonarY Rehabilitation in COPD: The LIVELY COPD Project.
Status:
COMPLETED
Status Verified Date:
2017-08
Last Known Status:
None
Delayed Posting:
No
If Stopped, Why?:
Not Stopped
Has Expanded Access:
False
If Expanded Access, NCT#:
N/A
Has Expanded Access, NCT# Status:
N/A
Acronym:
LIVELY
Brief Summary:
The primary aim of this study is to assess the feasibility of conducting a trial to investigate the effectiveness of a physical activity intervention (physical activity consultation and a pedometer-based walking programme) versus pulmonary rehabilitation in improving physical activity in COPD.
Objectives are:
(i) to assess the feasibility (patient recruitment, adherence, drop-outs and adverse events) of delivering a physical activity intervention in the COPD patient population versus pulmonary rehabilitation; (ii) to explore users perceptions relating to satisfaction and benefits of a physical activity intervention versus pulmonary rehabilitation; (iii) to investigate between and within group change in physical activity, exercise capacity, quality of life, self-efficacy and changes in the transtheoretical model with the physical activity intervention versus pulmonary rehabilitation; and (iv) to examine the cost of delivering a physical activity intervention versus pulmonary rehabilitation for patients with COPD.
The hypothesis for this study is that it will be feasible to conduct a trial that will investigate the effectiveness of a physical activity intervention (physical activity consultation and a pedometer-based walking programme) compared to pulmonary rehabilitation for improving physical activity in COPD. The study will provide important information about interventions designed to promote and maintain physical activity, improve patient outcomes and increase patients' choice relating to exercise and physical activity interventions. It will provide a rationale and data for an adequately powered clinical trial evaluating the effects of a physical activity intervention.
Objectives are:
(i) to assess the feasibility (patient recruitment, adherence, drop-outs and adverse events) of delivering a physical activity intervention in the COPD patient population versus pulmonary rehabilitation; (ii) to explore users perceptions relating to satisfaction and benefits of a physical activity intervention versus pulmonary rehabilitation; (iii) to investigate between and within group change in physical activity, exercise capacity, quality of life, self-efficacy and changes in the transtheoretical model with the physical activity intervention versus pulmonary rehabilitation; and (iv) to examine the cost of delivering a physical activity intervention versus pulmonary rehabilitation for patients with COPD.
The hypothesis for this study is that it will be feasible to conduct a trial that will investigate the effectiveness of a physical activity intervention (physical activity consultation and a pedometer-based walking programme) compared to pulmonary rehabilitation for improving physical activity in COPD. The study will provide important information about interventions designed to promote and maintain physical activity, improve patient outcomes and increase patients' choice relating to exercise and physical activity interventions. It will provide a rationale and data for an adequately powered clinical trial evaluating the effects of a physical activity intervention.
Detailed Description:
A survey of pulmonary rehabilitation programmes mirrored the results of other UK studies and highlighted that there are not enough programmes available; currently in the UK less than 1.5% of patients with COPD receive pulmonary rehabilitation per year. Only a proportion of patients are targeted i.e. those with moderate to severe disease. The majority of programmes are outpatient-based and are supervised by clinicians. This structured and supervised format of pulmonary rehabilitation does not meet the needs of all patients with high numbers of dropouts and non-adherence; yet alternative options for increasing physical activity for patients with COPD currently do not seem to be offered.
A home-based pedometer-driven walking intervention offers an alternative method of delivering physical activity training that could be provided to larger numbers of patients, at a lower cost and with flexibility around life commitments. It would also provide patients with more choice when deciding whether to participate in exercise or physical activity.
To date no study has compared a home-based walking intervention to structured, supervised pulmonary rehabilitation or the patient preferences or cost of the two programmes. For this reason, there is a need to compare a home-based-walking intervention to the standard method of providing patients with physical activity training, i.e. pulmonary rehabilitation. Therefore this study is essential as it will assess the feasibility of conducting a trial to investigate the efficacy of a physical activity intervention (physical activity consultation and a pedometer-based walking programme) versus pulmonary rehabilitation in improving physical activity in COPD.
A home-based pedometer-driven walking intervention offers an alternative method of delivering physical activity training that could be provided to larger numbers of patients, at a lower cost and with flexibility around life commitments. It would also provide patients with more choice when deciding whether to participate in exercise or physical activity.
To date no study has compared a home-based walking intervention to structured, supervised pulmonary rehabilitation or the patient preferences or cost of the two programmes. For this reason, there is a need to compare a home-based-walking intervention to the standard method of providing patients with physical activity training, i.e. pulmonary rehabilitation. Therefore this study is essential as it will assess the feasibility of conducting a trial to investigate the efficacy of a physical activity intervention (physical activity consultation and a pedometer-based walking programme) versus pulmonary rehabilitation in improving physical activity in COPD.
Study Oversight
Has Oversight DMC:
True
Is a FDA Regulated Drug?:
None
Is a FDA Regulated Device?:
None
Is an Unapproved Device?:
None
Is a PPSD?:
None
Is a US Export?:
None
Is an FDA AA801 Violation?: