Comparative efficacy of different digital health intervention modalities versus traditional pulmonary rehabilitation on daily step counts and exercise capacity in patients with COPD: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

不同数字健康干预模式与传统肺康复对慢性阻塞性肺病患者每日步数和运动能力的比较疗效:系统评价和网络荟萃分析

阅读:3

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Digital health interventions (DHIs) provide essential technical support for home-based rehabilitation in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD); however, the comparative efficacy of different technological modalities on objective exercise outcomes remains unclear. This study aimed to evaluate and rank the relative effectiveness of various digital intervention modalities in improving daily step counts and the 6-min walk distance (6MWD) in patients with COPD using a network meta-analysis. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published from inception to October 28, 2025. Intervention modalities were categorized into: Composite Digital Interventions (App + Sensor), Wearables Only, Synchronous Tele-rehabilitation (Tele-rehab), Center-based Pulmonary Rehabilitation (Center-based PR), and Usual Care. A network meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model. The Surface Under the Cumulative Ranking curve (SUCRA) was utilized for probabilistic ranking, and the GRADE framework was employed to assess the certainty of evidence. RESULTS: Twenty-two RCTs involving 1,556 participants were included. Regarding the improvement of daily step counts, Synchronous Tele-rehab showed the highest ranking probability (SUCRA = 84.5%), followed by Composite Digital Interventions (SUCRA = 66.8%). Compared with usual care, Composite Digital Interventions demonstrated a statistically significant difference (SMD = 0.20, 95% CI: 0.04-0.35); however, significant inconsistency was observed within the network (p = 0.0001). In terms of improving the 6MWD, the Wearables Only group showed the optimal ranking probability (SUCRA = 90.3%) with marginal statistical significance (SMD = 0.33, 95% CI: 0.00-0.66). Nevertheless, sensitivity analysis indicated that this conclusion was significantly influenced by individual large-sample studies. GRADE assessment indicated that the certainty of evidence for primary outcomes was "low." No significant publication bias was detected. CONCLUSION: Based on preliminary observations from existing evidence, digital health interventions hold potential value in improving exercise outcomes in patients with COPD. However, due to the low certainty of evidence and the presence of network inconsistency, the current SUCRA ranking results should be interpreted as exploratory and hypothesis-generating rather than a definitive hierarchy of superiority. Digital health interventions should not be viewed as a full replacement for traditional rehabilitation but rather positioned as a complementary strategy particularly for patient populations in resource-limited settings or those lacking access to center-based services to extend the coverage of pulmonary rehabilitation. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420251271868, CRD420251271868.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。