Skip to main content
Clinical Trials/NCT01101282
NCT01101282
Completed
Not Applicable

Does the Addition of Positive Expiratory Pressure (PEP) Mask Therapy to Usual Medical Care Improve Patients' Symptoms, Quality or Life and Risk of Future Exacerbations in Individuals With Acute Exacerbations of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD)?

La Trobe University2 sites in 1 country92 target enrollmentJuly 2010

Overview

Phase
Not Applicable
Intervention
Not specified
Conditions
Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive
Sponsor
La Trobe University
Enrollment
92
Locations
2
Primary Endpoint
Symptom severity
Status
Completed
Last Updated
13 years ago

Overview

Brief Summary

This study aims to identify whether the addition of positive expiratory pressure (PEP) mask therapy to standard medical care improves clinically important outcomes in individuals with acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. It is hypothesized that those who receive the additional PEP mask therapy will show greater improvements than those who do not.

Detailed Description

This study aims to identify whether the addition of positive expiratory pressure (PEP) mask therapy to standard medical care improves symptoms, quality of life and risk of re-exacerbation in individuals with acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. A PEP mask is a small hand-held device that is self-applied over the nose and mouth. It creates a resistance against exhalation (outward) breaths which helps facilitate movement of sputum from the lungs towards the mouth. Participants will be recruited from two tertiary metropolitan hospitals in Melbourne, Australia and randomised to receive either 'usual care' (comprising medical management, non-invasive ventilation if required, rehabilitation and allied health interventions) or 'usual care' plus PEP mask therapy for the duration of their hospital admission. All participants will then complete daily diaries for six months after discharge. The effect of PEP mask therapy will be evaluated using a range of outcomes important to both patients and health care providers.

Registry
clinicaltrials.gov
Start Date
July 2010
End Date
January 2013
Last Updated
13 years ago
Study Type
Interventional
Study Design
Parallel
Sex
All

Investigators

Responsible Party
Principal Investigator
Principal Investigator

Christian Osadnik

Physiotherapist, PhD candidate

La Trobe University

Eligibility Criteria

Inclusion Criteria

  • Not provided

Exclusion Criteria

  • Not provided

Outcomes

Primary Outcomes

Symptom severity

Time Frame: 6 months following hospital discharge

Measured via the BCSS

Secondary Outcomes

  • Number of acute exacerbations(6 months following hospital discharge)
  • Total number of hospitalised days(6 months following hospital discharge)
  • Mortality (predicted)(6 months following hospital discharge)
  • Number of hospitalisations (due to respiratory illness)(6 months following hospital discharge)
  • Mortality (actual, all cause)(6 months following hospital discharge)
  • Lung function (spirometry)(6 months following hospital discharge)
  • Time to first exacerbation(6 months following hospital discharge)
  • Time to first hospitalisation (due to respiratory illness)(6 months following hospital discharge)
  • Disease-specific quality of life(6 months following hospital discharge)
  • Need for assisted (non-invasive and/or invasive) ventilation during hospitalisation (within, and after 48 hours of presentation to hospital)(At hospital discharge (up to approx. day 10))
  • Hospital length of stay(At hospital discharge (up to approx. day 10))

Study Sites (2)

Loading locations...

Similar Trials