Cited by 92Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) ResearchMindfulness and Compassion InterventionsAsthma and respiratory diseases

Randomized Controlled Trial of Mindfulness-Based Therapy for Dyspnea in Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease

Mularski, Richard A., Munjas, Brett A., Lorenz, Karl A., Sun, Su, Robertson, Sandra J., Schmelzer, Wendy, Kim, Adina C., Shekelle, Paul G.·2009·The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Patients with chronic obstructive lung disease (COPD) suffer from significant dyspnea and may benefit from complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) therapies aimed at mitigating symptoms. The objective of this study was to test the efficacy of a mindfulness-based breathing therapy (MBBT) on improving symptoms and health-related quality of life in those with COPD. DESIGN: We conducted a randomized controlled trial of 8-week mindfulness-based breathing therapy (MBBT) compared to support groups to test efficacy on improving symptoms and health-related quality of life in those with COPD. SETTING: The setting for this study was an academic-affiliated veterans healthcare system. SUBJECTS: The subjects consisted of 86 patients with COPD. INTERVENTIONS: MBBT included weekly meetings practicing mindfulness mediation and relaxation response. OUTCOME MEASURES: The main outcome measure was a post 6-minute-walk test (6MWT) Borg dyspnea assessment. Other outcome measures included health-related quality of life measures, 6MWT distance, symptom scores, exacerbation rates, and measures of stress and mindfulness. Analysis of covariance compared differences in outcomes between groups; paired t test evaluated changes within groups. RESULTS: Participants were predominantly elderly men with moderate to severe COPD. We found no improvements in dyspnea (post 6MWT Borg difference between the MBBT and support group was 0.3 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -1.1, 1.7). We found no differences between groups in almost all other outcome measures by either intention-to-treat analysis or within the subset that completed assigned group sessions. For the physical summary scale of the generic Short Form-36 for Veterans, the difference between outcomes favored the support group (4.3, 95% CI: 0.4, 8.1). Participant retention was low compared to mind-body trials that randomize from CAM wait lists. CONCLUSIONS: This trial found no measurable improvements in patients with COPD receiving a mindfulness-based breathing CAM therapy compared to a support group, suggesting that this intervention is unlikely to be an important therapeutic option for those with moderate-to-severe COPD.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1089/acm.2009.0037

Cites

59 of 59 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Compared with a support group, mindfulness-based breathing therapy produced no significant improvement in exacerbation rates, health-related quality of life, mindfulness, 6-minute walk test distance, dyspnoea, stress or symptom scores in patients with COPD.

    “However, compared with the support group, no significant improvement has been observed in exacerbation rates of the randomised controlled trial (RCT), the health-related quality of life measures, mindfulness, 6-minute walk test (6MWT) distance, dyspnoea, stress or symptom scores for patients with COPD after receiving mindfulness-based breathing therapy.35”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mularski, R. A., Munjas, B. A., Lorenz, K. A., Sun, S., Robertson, S. J., Schmelzer, W., Kim, A. C., & Shekelle, P. G.
Affiliations
  • Kaiser Permanente (US)
  • VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System (US)
Corresponding author
Mularski, Richard A.
Venue
The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine
Published
2009-10
Volume
15
Issue
10
Pages
1083-1090
ISSN
  • 1075-5535 (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-7708
OpenAlex
W2090807455
Cited by
92
References
59
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 8
FWCI
3.63
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Samueli Institute
  • Health Services Research and Development
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Asthma and respiratory diseases
Keywords
chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, dyspnea, mindfulness meditation, relaxation response, complementary and alternative medicine, health-related quality of life, support groups, veterans, 6-minute walk test
MeSH terms
Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Analysis of Variance, Breathing Exercises, Dyspnea, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Quality of Life, Relaxation Therapy, Severity of Illness Index, Stress, Psychological, Walking, Meditation, Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive, Intention to Treat Analysis

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review