A self-management programme for COPD: a randomised controlled trial
Open accessAbstract
Studies of programmes of self-management support for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) have been inconclusive. The Self-Management Programme of Activity, Coping and Education (SPACE) FOR COPD is a 6-week self-management intervention for COPD, and this study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of this intervention in primary care. A single-blind randomised controlled trial recruited people with COPD from primary care and randomised participants to receive usual care or SPACE FOR COPD. Outcome measures were performed at baseline, 6 weeks and 6 months. The primary outcome was symptom burden, measured by the self-reported Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire (CRQ-SR) dyspnoea domain. Secondary outcomes included other domains of the CRQ-SR, shuttle walking tests, disease knowledge, anxiety, depression, self-efficacy, smoking status and healthcare utilisation. 184 people with COPD were recruited and randomised. At 6 weeks, there were significant differences between groups in CRQ-SR dyspnoea, fatigue and emotion scores, exercise performance, anxiety, and disease knowledge. At 6 months, there was no between-group difference in change in CRQ-SR dyspnoea. Exercise performance, anxiety and smoking status were significantly different between groups at 6 months, in favour of the intervention. This brief self-management intervention did not improve dyspnoea over and above usual care at 6 months; however, there were gains in anxiety, exercise performance, and disease knowledge.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Six studies reported on COPD-specific outcomes.
“Six studies reported on COPD-specific outcomes”
From Helping patients help themselves: A systematic review of self-management support strategies in primary health care practice (2019) · cites this paper as [68]
Seven RCTs reported non-significant improvements in self-efficacy.
“Seven RCTs reported non-significant improvements in self-efficacy”
From Helping patients help themselves: A systematic review of self-management support strategies in primary health care practice (2019) · cites this paper as [68]
Changes in perceived self-efficacy were reported in 14 studies.
“Changes in perceived self-efficacy were reported in 14 studies”
From Helping patients help themselves: A systematic review of self-management support strategies in primary health care practice (2019) · cites this paper as [68]
Nine studies reported disease knowledge as an outcome.
“Nine studies reported disease knowledge as an outcome [52, 66–68, 71, 81, 82, 88, 93, 111].”
From Helping patients help themselves: A systematic review of self-management support strategies in primary health care practice (2019) · cites this paper as [68]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 23 · Cited by 133
- Authors
- Mitchell, K. E., Johnson-Warrington, V., Apps, L. D., Bankart, J., Sewell, L., Williams, J. E., Rees, K., Jolly, K., Steiner, M., Morgan, M., & Singh, S. J.
- Affiliations
- University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust (GB)
- Keele University (GB)
- University of Warwick (GB)
- University of Birmingham (GB)
- ORCID
- Venue
- European Respiratory Journal
- Publisher
- European Respiratory Society (ERS)
- Published
- 2014-09-03
- Volume
- 44
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1538-1547
- ISSN
- 0903-1936 (ISSN-L)
- 1399-3003
- OpenAlex
- W2135105002
- Cited by
- 133
- References
- 23
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 22 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 4
- FWCI
- 9.10
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- European Respiratory Journal (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Coventry University Open Collections (Coventry university) (submittedVersion)
- Pure (Coventry University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- University of Birmingham Research Portal (University of Birmingham) (submittedVersion)
- The Open Collections (Coventry University) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust
- National Institute for Health and Care Research (PB-PG-0808-17146, WMCLAHRC-2014-1)
- Medical Research Council (MR/K00414X/1)
- Research for Patient Benefit Programme
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Asthma and respiratory diseases
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Pharmacy › Nursing care and research
- Keywords
- chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, self-management interventions, primary care, dyspnea, Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire, exercise performance, anxiety, depression, disease knowledge, smoking, self-efficacy, health care utilization, fatigue
- MeSH terms
- Aged, Anxiety, Depression, Dyspnea, Exercise Test, Female, Health Services, Humans, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Male, Middle Aged, Patient Education as Topic, Surveys and Questionnaires, Self Care, Severity of Illness Index, Smoking, Single-Blind Method, Self Efficacy, Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive, Risk Reduction Behavior, Resistance Training
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