@article {de Souzarespcare.05656, author = {Yves de Souza and Kenia Maynard da Silva and Diego Condesso and Bianca Figueira and Arnaldo J Noronha Filho and Rog{\'e}rio Rufino and Rik Gosselink and Cl{\'a}udia H da Costa}, title = {Use of a Home-Based Manual as Part of a Pulmonary Rehabilitation Program}, elocation-id = {respcare.05656}, year = {2018}, doi = {10.4187/respcare.05656}, publisher = {Respiratory Care}, abstract = {BACKGROUND: Pulmonary rehabilitation programs improve exercise capacity and quality of life in patients with COPD. Domiciliary strategies to maintain these benefits have been proposed.OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine whether a rehabilitation manual would facilitate the maintenance of the benefits acquired during out-patient pulmonary rehabilitation.METHODS: Fifty subjects with stable COPD were included (26 women and 24 men). All the subjects were evaluated during screening and after 12 wk of out-patient rehabilitation, and then were randomly divided into 2 groups, with one group that received the rehabilitation manual for home use (manual group) and the other group only received verbal recommendations (control group). At this point, the 2 groups were similar. After 12 wk at home, both groups were evaluated a third time. All evaluations included a 6-min walk test (6MWT), 6-min step test, COPD Assessment Test, and measurement of dyspnea by using the modified Medical Research Council dyspnea scale.RESULTS: When comparing the results of the 6MWT and 6-min step test done at out-patient discharge and after 12 wk at home, the manual group presented no differences (6MWT, 0 {\textpm} 25 m; 6-min step test, 1 {\textpm} 32 steps), whereas the control subjects lost part of the gain obtained during rehabilitation (6MWT -46 {\textpm} 36 m; 6-min step test -39 {\textpm} 33 steps). There was a significant difference between the groups (P \< .05). When comparing the same time points, the change in the COPD Assessment Test score was -1 {\textpm} 1 for the manual group and 1 {\textpm} 2 for the control group (P = .01). For the modified Medical Research Council dyspnea scale, the change in score was 0 {\textpm} 1 for the manual group and 1 {\textpm} 1 for the control group (P = .01).CONCLUSIONS: The use of a simple, well-illustrated manual facilitated the maintenance of the benefits acquired in out-patient pulmonary rehabilitation over a period of 3 months after study termination.}, issn = {0020-1324}, URL = {https://rc.rcjournal.com/content/early/2018/08/07/respcare.05656}, eprint = {https://rc.rcjournal.com/content/early/2018/08/07/respcare.05656.full.pdf}, journal = {Respiratory Care} }