Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33164264›Full record

Trial reportRespirology (Carlton, Vic.)2021

Pulmonary Daoyin as a traditional Chinese medicine rehabilitation programme for patients with IPF: A randomized controlled trial.

Miao Zhou, Hailong Zhang, Fenglei Li, Zhefeng Yu, Chengbo Yuan, Brian Oliver, Jiansheng Li

Open access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Respirology (Carlton, Vic.), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Self-management interventions for people with pulmonary fibrosis: a scoping review.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2023
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.

Miao ZhouCo-Construction Collaborative Innovation Center for Chinese Medicine and Respiratory Diseases by Henan and Education Ministry of P.R. China, Henan University of Chinese Medicine, Zhengzhou, China.
Hailong ZhangCo-Construction Collaborative Innovation Center for Chinese Medicine and Respiratory Diseases by Henan and Education Ministry of P.R. China, Henan University of Chinese Medicine, Zhengzhou, China.ORCID 0000-0003-3808-6586
Fenglei LiDepartment of Respiratory, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Henan University of Chinese Medicine, Zhengzhou, China.
Zhefeng YuDepartment of Respiratory, Ruzhou Hospital of Chinese Medicine, Pingdingshan, China.
Chengbo YuanDepartment of Respiratory, Affiliated Hospital of Changchun University of Chinese Medicine, Changchun, China.
Brian OliverSchool of Life Sciences, Faculty of Science, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Jiansheng LiCo-Construction Collaborative Innovation Center for Chinese Medicine and Respiratory Diseases by Henan and Education Ministry of P.R. China, Henan University of Chinese Medicine, Zhengzhou, China.ORCID 0000-0002-6485-2371
Henan University · CNChangchun University of Chinese Medicine · CNFirst Affiliated Hospital of Henan University · CNPingdingshan University · CNUniversity of Technology Sydney · AUZero to Three · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

objectiveIPF is a chronic progressive lung disease in which PR provides benefit for patients. PD, a TCM PR programme, has known effectiveness in COPD, but its utility in IPF is unknown. We investigated its effectiveness and safety in patients with IPF.

methodsA 6-month randomized controlled trial (RCT) was conducted in three Chinese clinics. Ninety-six participants diagnosed with IPF were randomly assigned to one of the three groups: the PD group received a PD programme two times a day, 5 days/week for 2 months, and the exercise group exercised via a stationary cycle ergometer, 30 min/day, 5 days/week for 2 months. Volunteers in the control group were advised to maintain their usual activities. Primary outcomes were changes from baseline in the 6MWD and HRQoL score on the SGRQ-I at 1 and 2 months (at the end of the intervention) and at 6 months (4 months after the intervention). Secondary outcomes measures included FVC, DL

resultsThe 6MWD was increased in the PD group compared to exercise and control groups. 6MWD increased by 60.44 m in the PD group, 32.16 m in the exercise group and 12.42 m in controls after the 2 months of rehabilitation programme. The between-group differences in the change from baseline were 28.78 m (95% CI: 0.54 to 56.01; P = 0.044) and 48.02 m (95% CI: 23.04 to 73.00; P < 0.001) at 2 months, and 25.61 m (95% CI: -0.67 to 51.89; P = 0.058) and 50.93 m (95% CI: 25.47 to 76.40; P < 0.001) at 6 months, respectively, including a difference exceeding the MCID. There was no significant change in the SGRQ-I score, the mMRC dyspnoea score, FVC and DL

conclusionTwo months after the intervention, a clinically meaningful difference in 6MWD was observed favouring the PD programme. The PD programme is safe and effective as a rehabilitation intervention designed to increase exercise tolerance and is an appropriate substitute for PR.

Indexed as

Medicine, Chinese TraditionalPulmonary Disease, Chronic ObstructiveDyspneaExercise ToleranceFemaleHumansLungMaleQuality of Life6-min walking distanceDaoyinidiopathic pulmonary fibrosispulmonary rehabilitationtraditional Chinese medicine

Identifiers

PMID33164264
PMCPMC8048896
OpenAlexW3104373231

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.