Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • Authors/reviewers
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Peer reviewer login
  • Journal club
  • Alerts
  • Subscriptions
  • ERS Publications
    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS Books
    • ERS publications home

User menu

  • Log in
  • Subscribe
  • Contact Us
  • My Cart
  • Log out

Search

  • Advanced search
  • ERS Publications
    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS Books
    • ERS publications home

Login

European Respiratory Society

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • Authors/reviewers
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Peer reviewer login
  • Journal club
  • Alerts
  • Subscriptions

Impact of COVID-19 shielding on physical activity and quality of life in patients with COPD

Emily Hume, Matthew Armstrong, James Manifield, Laura McNeillie, Francesca Chambers, Lynsey Wakenshaw, Graham Burns, Karen Heslop Marshall, Ioannis Vogiatzis
Breathe 2020 16: 200231; DOI: 10.1183/20734735.0231-2020
Emily Hume
1Dept of Sport, Exercise and Rehabilitation, Faculty of Health & Life Sciences, Northumbria University Newcastle, Newcastle, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: emily.c.hume@northumbria.ac.uk
Matthew Armstrong
1Dept of Sport, Exercise and Rehabilitation, Faculty of Health & Life Sciences, Northumbria University Newcastle, Newcastle, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
James Manifield
1Dept of Sport, Exercise and Rehabilitation, Faculty of Health & Life Sciences, Northumbria University Newcastle, Newcastle, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for James Manifield
Laura McNeillie
2Physiotherapy Dept, The Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Francesca Chambers
2Physiotherapy Dept, The Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Lynsey Wakenshaw
2Physiotherapy Dept, The Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Graham Burns
3Chest Clinic, The Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Karen Heslop Marshall
3Chest Clinic, The Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Karen Heslop Marshall
Ioannis Vogiatzis
1Dept of Sport, Exercise and Rehabilitation, Faculty of Health & Life Sciences, Northumbria University Newcastle, Newcastle, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

In response to #COVID19, healthcare professionals should scale up virtual consultations for assessing core patient-reported outcomes and providing home-based rehabilitation programmes #COPD https://bit.ly/30gQEpG

COVID-19 is a highly infectious disease that can cause severe respiratory illness, particularly in patients with pre-existing lung conditions such as COPD [1]. To prevent infection during the peak of the pandemic, patients considered to be clinically extremely vulnerable were instructed to “shield” at home, resulting in significant restrictions to usual daily activities and social interaction. In the absence of a preventative vaccine, these public health measures are imperative to reduce transmission of the virus. However, despite this positive aspect, there are likely to be harmful repercussions on people's physical and mental health.

The adverse effects of physical inactivity in COPD patients are well known and include worsening of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) [2], along with an increased risk of hospitalisations and mortality [3]. The COVID-19 restrictions have posed challenges for the entire population to stay active, with many turning to online resources for support and guidance. However, some patients with limited access or knowledge of how to use these resources may be disadvantaged and might not benefit. In addition to the instruction to shield, the provision of many respiratory clinical services including pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) were suspended and staff redeployed. These programmes remain imperative for those with chronic lung disease, and the demand is now accompanied by an emerging call for rehabilitation/recovery programmes for COVID-19 patients [4]. A wealth of evidence highlights the use of PR for improving exercise capacity, HRQoL and symptoms. PR also promotes adherence to health enhancing behaviours, facilitating the translation of enhanced exercise capacity to greater participation in physical activities  [5]. However, upon completion, these benefits tend to diminish over the first 6–12 months if no on-going exercise is performed [6]. The COVID-19 shielding period could, therefore, have potentially exacerbated the loss of health benefits attained by patients recently completing a PR programme. Studies employing maintenance interventions in the form of supervised and technology assisted exercise have shown some promise in maintaining PR benefits [7].

We followed up a cohort of 10 COPD patients (mean±sd forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1): 55±23% predicted), who completed an 8-week PR course between January and March 2020 in the North East of England. Physical activity was measured using accelerometry (Actigraph wGT3X; Actigraph, Pensacola, FL, USA) and the Clinical Visit of Proactive Physical Activity in COPD (C-PPAC) instrument [8] in the week preceding PR, the week following completion of PR and for a week 3 months following completion of PR during the shielding period (April to July 2020). In addition, assessment of HRQoL (COPD Assessment Test (CAT) and Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ)) and psychological wellbeing (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS)) was undertaken. Patients were first contacted by telephone, then an accelerometer and the questionnaires were sent to them in the post. These patients had been previously enrolled in a study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03749655) investigating the inclusion of physical activity promotion alongside PR and were therefore familiar with the assessment procedures and willing to be monitored.

The results showed a significant and clinically meaningful (>600–1100 steps per day [9]) decrease in daily steps from post-PR to shielding, as well as pre-PR to shielding (figure 1a). The deterioration in daily steps was also accompanied by a significant and clinically meaningful (4 points [8]) worsening in the C-PPAC score from post-PR to shielding (figure 1b), demonstrating not only a reduction in the amount of activity undertaken, but also an increase in the perceived difficulty of conducting physical activity.

Figure  1
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure  1

a) Daily steps and b) C-PPAC scores pre-PR, post-PR and during shielding. Data are presented as mean±sd. *:  significant difference between time points, p<0.05; #: clinically meaningful difference between time points.

A previous multicentre trial involving 157 COPD patients, showed a downward trajectory of physical activity over time, evidenced through a 16% and 18% decrease in daily steps over 6 months and a year, respectively [10]. It is clear from our preliminary data, that “shielding” has further exacerbated physical activity decline, shown through a 39% reduction in daily steps from post-PR to shielding (3 months). The deterioration (−1620±1573 steps per day) also exceeds that previously exhibited over the year following PR of 600–1000 steps [11, 12]. Furthermore, there was a 32% decline from pre-PR to shielding. This worsening below pre-rehabilitation suggests that not only could some of the benefits attained during PR be lost, but also further deconditioning is likely to have occurred, potentially resulting in worsened long-term disease-related outcomes and an increased risk of comorbidities. Additionally, the decline is significantly higher than that seen in the general UK population (−7.8%) during the lockdown period [13]. This is partly due to the total home confinement of shielding compared with partial confinement for non-vulnerable individuals, as other countries with more stringent restrictions had a greater decline. However, shielding has probably exacerbated the vicious cycle of declining physical activity, leading to increased symptoms and further activity avoidance, which is already evident in COPD patients.

Physical inactivity and deconditioning can often lead to worsening symptoms (breathlessness and leg discomfort), and subsequent worsening of physical functioning and HRQoL [14]. The data collected from this cohort showed a decline in CCQ scores from post-PR to shielding which exceeded clinically meaningful margins (±0.4 points) for both functional (+0.5 points) and mental domains (+0.7 points) (figure 2). This indicates that shielding caused patients to feel increasingly limited when conducting daily physical activities, which is accompanied with heightened feelings of depression and concerns about breathing. In the general population, the strong link between social isolation and anxiety, depression and cognitive decline is well established [15]. It is perhaps surprising that no statistically or clinically meaningful changes in anxiety or depression (HADS) and health-related quality of life (CAT scores) were seen in this follow-up. It is possible that patients initially felt safer whilst shielding; however, it will be interesting to follow these patients longitudinally to observe if any changes ensue as the uncertainty of the COVID-19 pandemic continues.

Figure  2
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure  2

a) CCQ total score, b) symptom score, c) functional state score and d) mental state score pre-PR, post-PR and during shielding. Data are presented as mean±sd. #: clinically meaningful difference between time points.

Clinical implications

The findings from this follow-up confirm that the shielding period has caused a significant deterioration in patients' physical activity within a short time period of 3 months. It is important to consider that this data reflects patients who have recently undergone PR; therefore, it is likely that the effects of shielding are worse for the remaining COPD population who have not recently participated in PR. Due to the well-established association between physical inactivity and adverse clinical outcomes, focus on supporting patients to self-manage their condition and remain physically active at home is imperative. This could be done by using tools, such as tablet computers, pedometers, pulse oximeters and exercise diaries, while providing remote specialist support (e.g. over the telephone) to increase patient confidence to exercise at home independently [16].

The pandemic has increased the urgency of developing novel ways of delivering PR programmes and supporting patients remotely. Clinicians continue to explore alternative modes of remote PR delivery and maintenance, including home-based minimally supervised rehabilitation, internet-based programmes, pedometer-based programmes, yoga and t'ai chi exercise. Indeed, virtual consultations have emerged as a consequence of the pandemic, replacing face-to-face consultations. These have been found to be largely acceptable by both patients and clinicians [17]. In the majority of cases, virtual consultations are taking place over the telephone but there is also the possibility for video consultations, when the patient has access to the internet and can use a tablet computer or smart phone. Video consultations may be conducted over communication platforms (e.g. Microsoft Teams or Zoom) or preferably other secure platforms hosted by the National Health Authorities (such as “Attend Anywhere” in the UK).

Virtual consultations should aim to provide patients with a tailored programme at home including: 1) an educational component on managing the disease; 2) psychological support; 3) nutritional support; 4) advice to be physically active indoors and outdoors (if in accordance with public health guidance); 5) access to resource packs for improving well-being; and 6) home diaries for patients to record their progress and symptoms that can be reviewed regularly by healthcare professionals. Where resources are limited, patients may be directed to established sources such as the British Lung Foundation or Lung Foundation Australia with access to specifically designed exercise videos, or handbooks for those without internet access [18, 19]. Safety guidance for remotely supervised interventions provided by national respiratory societies [20] should be followed closely to ensure patient safety and correct prescription of exercise. The preliminary data from this follow-up indicates that the instruction to shield in vulnerable, clinical populations might have been a double-edged sword, and clinicians should be wary of long-term detrimental effects when returning to patient treatment.

Footnotes

  • Conflict of interest: E. Hume has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: M. Armstrong has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: J. Manifield has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: L. McNeillie has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: F. Chambers has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: L. Wakenshaw has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: G. Burns has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: K. Heslop Marshall has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: I. Vogiatzis has nothing to disclose.

  • Received September 10, 2020.
  • Accepted September 21, 2020.
  • Copyright ©ERS 2020
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

Breathe articles are open access and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial Licence 4.0.

References

  1. ↵
    1. Alqahtani JS,
    2. Oyelade T,
    3. Aldhahir AM, et al.
    Prevalence, severity and mortality associated with copd and smoking in patients with COVID-19: a rapid systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One 2020; 15: e0233147-e. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0233147
    OpenUrl
  2. ↵
    1. Esteban C,
    2. Quintana JM,
    3. Aburto M, et al.
    Impact of changes in physical activity on health-related quality of life among patients with COPD. Eur Respir J 2010; 36: 292–300. doi:10.1183/09031936.00021409
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  3. ↵
    1. Garcia-Aymerich J,
    2. Lange P,
    3. Benet M, et al.
    Regular physical activity reduces hospital admission and mortality in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a population based cohort study. Thorax 2006; 61: 772–778. doi:10.1136/thx.2006.060145
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  4. ↵
    1. Spruit MA,
    2. Holland AE,
    3. Singh SJ, et al.
    COVID-19: interim guidance on rehabilitation in the hospital and post-hospital phase from a European Respiratory Society and American Thoracic Society-coordinated International Task Force. Eur  Respir J 2020; 56: 2002197. doi:10.1183/13993003.02197-2020
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. ↵
    1. Spruit MA,
    2. Pitta F,
    3. McAuley E, et al.
    Pulmonary rehabilitation and physical activity in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2015; 192: 924–933. doi:10.1164/rccm.201505-0929CI
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. ↵
    1. Spruit MA,
    2. Singh SJ
    . Maintenance programs after pulmonary rehabilitation: how may we advance this field? Chest 2013; 144: 1091–1093. doi:10.1378/chest.13-0775
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. ↵
    1. Spencer LM,
    2. McKeough ZJ
    . Maintaining the benefits following pulmonary rehabilitation: achievable or not? Respirology 2019; 24: 909–915. doi:10.1111/resp.13518
    OpenUrlPubMed
  8. ↵
    1. Gimeno-Santos E,
    2. Raste Y,
    3. Demeyer H, et al.
    The PROactive instruments to measure physical activity in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Eur Respir J 2015; 46: 988–1000. doi:10.1183/09031936.00183014
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  9. ↵
    1. Demeyer H,
    2. Burtin C,
    3. Hornikx M, et al.
    The minimal important difference in physical activity in patients with COPD. PLoS One 2016; 11: e0154587-e.
    OpenUrl
  10. ↵
    1. Boutou AK,
    2. Raste Y,
    3. Demeyer H, et al.
    Progression of physical inactivity in COPD patients: the effect of time and climate conditions - a multicenter prospective cohort study. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis 2019; 14: 1979–1992. doi:10.2147/COPD.S208826
    OpenUrlPubMed
  11. ↵
    1. Holland AE,
    2. Mahal A,
    3. Hill CJ, et al.
    Home-based rehabilitation for COPD using minimal resources: a randomised, controlled equivalence trial. Thorax 2017; 72: 57–65. doi:10.1136/thoraxjnl-2016-208514
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  12. ↵
    1. Cruz J,
    2. Brooks D,
    3. Marques A
    . Walk2Bactive: A  randomised controlled trial of a physical activity-focused behavioural intervention beyond pulmonary rehabilitation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Chron Respir Dis 2016; 13: 57–66. doi:10.1177/1479972315619574
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  13. ↵
    1. Pépin JL,
    2. Bruno RM,
    3. Yang RY, et al.
    Wearable activity trackers for monitoring adherence to home confinement during the COVID-19 pandemic worldwide: data aggregation and analysis. J Med Internet Res 2020; 22: e19787. doi:10.2196/19787
    OpenUrl
  14. ↵
    1. Troosters T,
    2. van der Molen T,
    3. Polkey M, et al.
    Improving physical activity in COPD: towards a new paradigm. Respir Res 2013; 14: 115. doi:10.1186/1465-9921-14-115
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  15. ↵
    1. Webb L
    . COVID-19 lockdown: A perfect storm for older people's mental health. J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs 2020; in press [https://doi.org/10.1111/jpm.12644].doi:10.1111/jpm.12644
  16. ↵
    1. Vasilopoulou M,
    2. Papaioannou AI,
    3. Kaltsakas G, et al.
    Home-based maintenance tele-rehabilitation reduces the risk for acute exacerbations of COPD, hospitalisations and emergency department visits. Eur Respir J 2017; 49; 1602129. doi:10.1183/13993003.02129-2016
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  17. ↵
    1. Gilbert AW,
    2. Billany JCT,
    3. Adam R, et al.
    Rapid implementation of virtual clinics due to COVID-19: report and early evaluation of a quality improvement initiative. BMJ  Open Qual 2020; 9: e000985. doi:10.1136/bmjoq-2020-000985
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  18. ↵
    British Lung Foundation. Stay active and stay well. 2020. www.blf.org.uk/support-for-you/keep-active/exercise-video
  19. ↵
    Lung Foundation Australia. Healthy habits. 2020. www.lungfoundation.com.au/lung-health/protecting-your-lungs/coronavirus-disease-covid-19/physical-health/
  20. ↵
    1. Singh S,
    2. Bolton C,
    3. Nolan C, et al.
    BTS Guidance for pulmonary rehabilitation – Reopening services for the ‘business as usual’ participants. 2020. Available from:   www.brit-thoracic.org.uk/about-us/covid-19-resumption-and-continuation-of-respiratory-services/
PreviousNext
Back to top
Vol 16 Issue 3 Table of Contents
Breathe: 16 (3)
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on European Respiratory Society .

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Impact of COVID-19 shielding on physical activity and quality of life in patients with COPD
(Your Name) has sent you a message from European Respiratory Society
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the European Respiratory Society web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Print
Citation Tools
Impact of COVID-19 shielding on physical activity and quality of life in patients with COPD
Emily Hume, Matthew Armstrong, James Manifield, Laura McNeillie, Francesca Chambers, Lynsey Wakenshaw, Graham Burns, Karen Heslop Marshall, Ioannis Vogiatzis
Breathe Sep 2020, 16 (3) 200231; DOI: 10.1183/20734735.0231-2020

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Share
Impact of COVID-19 shielding on physical activity and quality of life in patients with COPD
Emily Hume, Matthew Armstrong, James Manifield, Laura McNeillie, Francesca Chambers, Lynsey Wakenshaw, Graham Burns, Karen Heslop Marshall, Ioannis Vogiatzis
Breathe Sep 2020, 16 (3) 200231; DOI: 10.1183/20734735.0231-2020
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Technorati logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Connotea logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
Full Text (PDF)

Jump To

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Clinical implications
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Subjects

  • COPD and smoking
  • Respiratory infections and tuberculosis
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

More in this TOC Section

  • Pulmonary vascular disease for the general respiratory clinician
  • Sleep medicine in Europe: 50 years of evolution
  • Managing respiratory disease in pregnancy
Show more Editorials

Related Articles

Navigate

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • Archive

About Breathe

  • Journal information
  • Editorial board
  • Press
  • Permissions and reprints
  • Advertising

The European Respiratory Society

  • Society home
  • myERS
  • Privacy policy
  • Accessibility

ERS publications

  • European Respiratory Journal
  • ERJ Open Research
  • European Respiratory Review
  • Breathe
  • ERS books online
  • ERS Bookshop

Help

  • Feedback

For authors

  • Intructions for authors
  • Publication ethics and malpractice
  • Submit a manuscript

For readers

  • Alerts
  • Subjects
  • RSS

Subscriptions

  • Accessing the ERS publications

Contact us

European Respiratory Society
442 Glossop Road
Sheffield S10 2PX
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 114 2672860
Email: journals@ersnet.org

ISSN

Print ISSN: 1810-6838
Online ISSN: 2073-4735

Copyright © 2023 by the European Respiratory Society