Remotely Monitored Home-based Pulmonary Rehabilitation in Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis: Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial.
rct · Level II
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 42532213.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1016/j.apmr.2026.07.019.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
In patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) on background antifibrotic therapy, we tested a home-based approach to pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) supported with remotely measured physiological variables. A randomized controlled trial with assessments during and after: Run-in (weeks 0-4), Intervention (weeks 5-16), and Post-intervention (weeks 17-20) periods. Recruitment: Hospital-based interstitial lung disease care centers and the greater IPF community of the region. An entirely home-based environment. Twenty-nine of 32 enrolled patients with IPF met criteria during Run-in for randomization to intervention ('I' n=15) and control ('C' n=14) arms. Arm I received a 12-week asynchronously remotely monitored, exercise-focused home PR intervention. Arm C received monitoring only. Smartphone-linked, Bluetooth™-enabled monitoring devices included accelerometer activity/HR monitor and medical-grade fingertip pulse oximeter. Primary: Change from Run-in for daily average moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) minutes. Feasibility was assessed as rates of completion, adherence, and adverse events (AEs). 6-minute walk distance (6MWD), VO<sub>2</sub>max, quality of life (QoL) psychometrics, plasma brain natriuretic peptide ([BNP]), exercise oxygen saturation, and perceived usability of the remote monitoring platform. Program completion was 100% and workout adherence for I was 92%. Primary outcome MVPA increased by 28% for I but decreased by 35% for C (p=0.001 group*time interaction), with an improvement in I (Δ=49±19 min/week) almost double the reported minimal clinically important difference for IPF. Within group effects were observed for several secondary endpoints in I, including increased 6MWD, decreased [BNP], and preserved VO<sub>2</sub>max and QoL. No AEs occurred, and intervention usability/satisfaction indicators were high. For patients with IPF on maintained background antifibrotic therapy, an entirely home-based, remote monitoring-enabled PR program is feasible and produces meaningful increase in moderate-to-vigorous physical activity. Benefits may additionally include improving exercise tolerance and mitigating deterioration of QoL in this challenging, progressive disease.