There is a need of consensus about the pulmonary rehabilitation\r\n(PR) in patients with COVID-19 after discharge from acute\r\ncare. To facilitate the knowledge of the evidence and its translation\r\ninto practice, we developed suggestions based on experts’\r\nopinion. A steering committee identified areas and questions sent\r\nto experts. Other international experts participated to a RAND\r\nDelphi method in reaching consensus and proposing further suggestions.\r\nStrong agreement in suggestions was defined when the\r\nmean agreement was >7 (1 = no agreement and 9 = maximal\r\nagreement). Panelists response rate was >95%. Twenty-three\r\nquestions from 4 areas: personnel protection equipment, phenotypes,\r\nassessments, interventions, were identified and experts\r\nanswered with 121 suggestions, 119 of which received high level\r\nof concordance. The evidence-based suggestions provide the clinicians\r\nwith current evidence and clinical experts opinion. This\r\nframework can be used to facilitate clinical decision making within\r\nthe context of the individual patient. Further studies will evaluate\r\nthe clinical usefulness of these suggestions.
Italian suggestions for pulmonary rehabilitation in COVID-19 patients recovering from acute respiratory failure: results of a Delphi process / M. Vitacca, M.L.. - In: MONALDI ARCHIVES FOR CHEST DISEASE. - ISSN 2532-5264. - 90:2(2020), pp. 385-393. [10.4081/monaldi.2020.1444]
Italian suggestions for pulmonary rehabilitation in COVID-19 patients recovering from acute respiratory failure: results of a Delphi process
V. Rossi;M. Santambrogio;M. Mantero;G. Castellini;
2020
Abstract
There is a need of consensus about the pulmonary rehabilitation\r\n(PR) in patients with COVID-19 after discharge from acute\r\ncare. To facilitate the knowledge of the evidence and its translation\r\ninto practice, we developed suggestions based on experts’\r\nopinion. A steering committee identified areas and questions sent\r\nto experts. Other international experts participated to a RAND\r\nDelphi method in reaching consensus and proposing further suggestions.\r\nStrong agreement in suggestions was defined when the\r\nmean agreement was >7 (1 = no agreement and 9 = maximal\r\nagreement). Panelists response rate was >95%. Twenty-three\r\nquestions from 4 areas: personnel protection equipment, phenotypes,\r\nassessments, interventions, were identified and experts\r\nanswered with 121 suggestions, 119 of which received high level\r\nof concordance. The evidence-based suggestions provide the clinicians\r\nwith current evidence and clinical experts opinion. This\r\nframework can be used to facilitate clinical decision making within\r\nthe context of the individual patient. Further studies will evaluate\r\nthe clinical usefulness of these suggestions.| File | Dimensione | Formato | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
nmoscato,+MONALDI_2020_2_1444_opt.pdf
accesso aperto
Tipologia:
Publisher's version/PDF
Licenza:
Creative commons
Dimensione
521.5 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
521.5 kB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
Pubblicazioni consigliate
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.




