Cochrane · systematic review · CD012290
Active mind‐body movement therapies as an adjunct to or in comparison with pulmonary rehabilitation for people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
Gendron, LM, Nyberg, A, Saey, D, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2018 · Cochrane Library
AirwaysAMSTAR 2: not assessed
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
11
current version
GRADE rated
9
No studies
0
Included studies
NR
No studies 0 · 0%Ungraded 2 · 18.2%Very low 6 · 54.5%Low 2 · 18.2%Moderate 1 · 9.1%High 0 · 0%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
Questions and results
Summary of findings for AMBMT vs PR
Population: patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
QoL ‐ Change in SGRQ total score Scale 0 to 100. Lower is better and 4 units is a clinically important difference Summary of findings for AMBMT vs PR | no estimate extracted | 3 studies · 249 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
QoL ‐ Change in CAT score Scale 0 to 40. Lower is better and 3 units is a clinically important difference Summary of findings for AMBMT vs PR | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 74 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, inconsistency, indirectness |
Dyspnoea ‐ change in CRQ Dyspnoea CRQ Dyspnoea. Scale 1 to 7. Higher is better and 0.5 unit is a clinically important difference Summary of findings for AMBMT vs PR | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 11 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, inconsistency, indirectness |
Dyspnoea ‐ change in mMRC Scale 0 to 4. Lower is better and 1 unit is a clinically important difference Summary of findings for AMBMT vs PR | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 127 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, inconsistency, indirectness |
Dyspnoea ‐ change in Borg Scale Borg CR‐10. Scale 0 to 10. Lower is better and 1 unit is a clinically important difference Summary of findings for AMBMT vs PR | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 139 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, inconsistency, indirectness |
Adverse eventsf Summary of findings for AMBMT vs PR | no estimate extracted | 8 studies · 490 participants | Ungraded |
Summary of findings for AMBMT + PR vs PR
Population: patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
QoL ‐ SF‐36 general Health Scale 0 to 100. Higher is better Summary of findings for AMBMT + PR vs PR | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 80 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
QoL ‐ SF‐36 mental health Scale 0 to 100. Higher is better Summary of findings for AMBMT + PR vs PR | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 80 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
QoL ‐ Change in SGRQ total score Scale 0 to 100. Lower is better and 4 units is a clinically important difference Summary of findings for AMBMT + PR vs PR | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 192 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Dyspnoea ‐ CRQ dyspnoea Scale 1 to 7. Higher is better and 0.5 units is a clinically important difference Summary of findings for AMBMT + PR vs PR | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 80 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Adverse eventsd Summary of findings for AMBMT + PR vs PR | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 272 participants | Ungraded |