Short Physical Performance Battery: Response to Pulmonary Rehabilitation and Minimal Important Difference Estimates in Patients With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

Anouk A Stoffels; Jana De Brandt; Roy Meys; Hieronymus W van Hees; Anouk W Vaes; Peter Klijn; Chris Burtin; Frits M Franssen; Bram van den Borst; Maurice J Sillen; Daisy J Janssen; Martijn A Spruit; BASES Consortium

doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2021.05.011

Short Physical Performance Battery: Response to Pulmonary Rehabilitation and Minimal Important Difference Estimates in Patients With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2021 Dec;102(12):2377-2384.e5. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2021.05.011. Epub 2021 Jun 25.

Authors

Affiliations

¹ Department of Pulmonary Diseases, Dekkerswald Radboud University Medical Centre, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Nijmegen, the Netherlands; Department of Research and Development, CIRO, Horn, the Netherlands; Department of Respiratory Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Centre (MUMC+), NUTRIM School of Nutrition and Translational Research in Metabolism, Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht, The Netherlands. Electronic address: anouk.stoffels@radboudumc.nl.
² REVAL-Rehabilitation Research Center, BIOMED-Biomedical Research Institute, Faculty of Rehabilitation Sciences, Hasselt University, Diepenbeek, Belgium.
³ Department of Research and Development, CIRO, Horn, the Netherlands; Department of Respiratory Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Centre (MUMC+), NUTRIM School of Nutrition and Translational Research in Metabolism, Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
⁴ Department of Pulmonary Diseases, Dekkerswald Radboud University Medical Centre, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
⁵ Department of Research and Development, CIRO, Horn, the Netherlands.
⁶ Department of Pulmonology, Merem Pulmonary Rehabilitation Centre, Hilversum, the Netherlands; Department of Pulmonary, Amsterdam University Medical Centre, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
⁷ Department of Research and Development, CIRO, Horn, the Netherlands; Department of Health Services Research, Care and Public Health Research Institute, Faculty of Health Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
⁸ Department of Research and Development, CIRO, Horn, the Netherlands; Department of Respiratory Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Centre (MUMC+), NUTRIM School of Nutrition and Translational Research in Metabolism, Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht, The Netherlands; REVAL-Rehabilitation Research Center, BIOMED-Biomedical Research Institute, Faculty of Rehabilitation Sciences, Hasselt University, Diepenbeek, Belgium.

PMID: 34175275
DOI: 10.1016/j.apmr.2021.05.011

Abstract

Objective: To determine the response to a pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) program and minimal important differences (MIDs) for the Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB) subtests and SPPB summary score in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

Design: Retrospective analysis using distribution- and anchor-based methods.

Setting: PR center in the Netherlands including a comprehensive 40-session 8-week inpatient or 14-week outpatient program.

Participants: A total of 632 patients with COPD (age, 65±8y; 50% male; forced expiratory volume in the first second=43% [interquartile range, 30%-60%] predicted).

Interventions: Not applicable.

Main outcome measure: Baseline and post-PR results of the SPPB, consisting of 3 balance standing tests, 4-meter gait speed (4MGS), and 5-repetition sit-to-stand (5STS). The chosen anchors were the 6-Minute Walk Test and COPD Assessment Test. Patients were stratified according to their SPPB summary scores into low-performance, moderate-performance, and high-performance groups.

Results: 5STS (∆=-1.14 [-4.20 to -0.93]s) and SPPB summary score (∆=1 [0-2] points) improved after PR in patients with COPD. In patients with a low performance at baseline, balance tandem and 4MGS significantly increased as well. Based on distribution-based calculations, the MID estimates ranged between 2.19 and 6.33 seconds for 5STS and 0.83 to 0.96 points for SPPB summary score.

Conclusions: The 5STS and SPPB summary score are both responsive to PR in patients with COPD. The balance tandem test and 4MGS are only responsive to PR in patients with COPD with a low performance at baseline. Based on distribution-based calculations, an MID estimate of 1 point for the SPPB summary score is recommended in patients with COPD. Future research is needed to confirm MID estimates for SPPB in different centers.

Keywords: Minimal important difference; Physical functional performance; Pulmonary disease, chronic obstructive; Rehabilitation.

Publication types

Observational Study
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

Aged
Exercise Test / standards*
Female
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Minimal Clinically Important Difference
Netherlands
Outcome Assessment, Health Care / standards*
Physical Functional Performance*
Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive / rehabilitation*
Respiratory Therapy / methods*
Retrospective Studies