부산대학교 도서관

Sarah Gephine,1,2 Olivier Le Rouzic,3,4 François Machuron,5 Benoit Wallaert,3 Cécile Chenivesse,3,4 Didier Saey,2 François Maltais,2 Patrick Mucci,1 Jean-Marie Grosbois6 1Univ. Lille, Univ. Artois, Univ. Littoral Côte d’Opale, ULR 7369 - URePSSS - Unité de Recherche Pluridisciplinaire Sport Santé Société, Lille F-59000, France; 2Institut Universitaire de Cardiologie et de Pneumologie de Québec, Université Laval, Québec, Canada; 3CHU Lille, Service de Pneumologie et Immuno-Allergologie, Centre de Référence Constitutif des Maladies Pulmonaires Rares, Lille F-59000, France; 4Univ. Lille, Lille F-59000, France; 5Department of Biostatistics, Univ. Lille, CHU Lille, EA 2694 - Santé Publique: Épidémiologie et Qualité des Soins, Lille F-59000, France; 6FormAction Santé, Pérenchies, FranceCorrespondence: Jean-Marie GrosboisFormAction Santé, Pérenchies, Zone d’Activité du Bois, Rue de Pietralunga, Pérenchies, F-59840, FranceEmail jmgrosbois@formactionsante.comBackground: Long-term effectiveness of pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) is still uncertain in older people with severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The objective was to compare the effects of home-based PR in people with COPD above and below the age of 70 years.Methods: In this retrospective study, 480 people with COPD were recruited and divided into those ≤ 70 (n=341) and those > 70 years of age (n=139). All participants underwent an 8 weeks of home-based PR, consisting of a weekly supervised 90-minute home session. Six-minute stepper test (6MST), timed-up and go test (TUG), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, and Visual Simplified Respiratory Questionnaire (VSRQ) were assessed at baseline (M0), at 2 (M2), 8 (M8), 14 (M14) months after baseline.Results: The older group was described by fewer current smokers (p < 0.001), more long-term oxygen therapy use (p = 0.024), higher prevalence of comorbidities (p< 0.001), lower 6MST score and higher TUG score (p< 0.001), compared to the younger group. Both groups improved every outcome at M2 compared to baseline. At M2, 88% of people ≤ 70 years of age and 79% of those above 70 were considered as responders in at least one evaluated parameter (p = 0.013). Both groups maintained the benefits at M14, except for the VSRQ score and the number of responders to this outcome in the older group.Conclusion: Regardless of the age, personalized home-based PR was effective for people with COPD in the short term. Above 70 years, an ageing effect appeared on the long-term effectiveness of quality of life benefit.Keywords: chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, exercise tolerance, pulmonary rehabilitation, quality of life, older age