Home-based or remote exercise testing in chronic respiratory disease, during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond: A rapid review
Authors:
Holland, A. E., Malaguti, C., Hoffman, M., Lahham, A., Burge, A. T., Dowman, L., May, A. K., Bondarenko, J., Graco, M., Tikellis, G., Lee, J. Y., and Cox, N. S.
Abstract:
OBJECTIVES: To identify exercise tests that are suitable for home-based or remote administration in people with chronic lung disease.
METHODS: Rapid review of studies that reported home-based or remote administration of an exercise test in people with chronic lung disease, and studies reporting their clinimetric (measurement) properties.
RESULTS: 84 studies were included. Tests used at home were the 6-minute walk test (6MWT, two studies), sit-to-stand tests (STS, five studies), Timed Up and Go (TUG, 4 studies) and step tests (two studies). Exercise tests administered remotely were the 6MWT (two studies) and step test (one study). Compared to centre-based testing the 6MWT distance was similar when performed outdoors but shorter when performed at home (two studies). The STS, TUG and step tests were feasible, reliable (intra-class correlation coefficients >0.80), valid (concurrent and known groups validity) and moderately responsive to pulmonary rehabilitation (medium effect sizes). These tests elicited less desaturation than the 6MWT, and validated methods to prescribe exercise were not reported.
DISCUSSION: The STS, step and TUG tests can be performed at home, but do not accurately document desaturation with walking or allow exercise prescription. Patients at risk of desaturation should be prioritised for centre-based exercise testing when this is available.
| 
| also see: database.cosmin.nl