COPD
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study Comparative Study
Efficacy and safety of aclidinium bromide compared with placebo and tiotropium in patients with moderate-to-severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: results from a 6-week, randomized, controlled Phase IIIb study.
This randomized, double-blind, Phase IIIb study evaluated the 24-hour bronchodilatory efficacy of aclidinium bromide versus placebo and tiotropium in patients with moderate-to-severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). ⋯ Aclidinium provided significant 24-hour bronchodilation versus placebo from day 1 with comparable efficacy to tiotropium after 6 weeks. Improvements in COPD symptoms were consistently numerically greater with aclidinium versus tiotropium. Aclidinium was generally well tolerated.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial
Impact of pulmonary rehabilitation on the major dimensions of dyspnea in COPD.
The evaluation of dyspnea and its responsiveness to therapy in COPD should consider the multidimensional nature of this symptom in each of its sensory-perceptual (intensity, quality), affective and impact domains. To gain new insights into mechanisms of dyspnea relief following pulmonary rehabilitation (PR), we examined effects on the major domains of dyspnea and their interaction with physiological training effects. This randomized, controlled study was conducted in 48 subjects with COPD. ⋯ There were no significant between-group differences in pre- to post-intervention changes in pulmonary function or physiological parameters during exercise. After PR versus CTRL, significant improvements were found in the affective and impact domains but not in the sensory-perceptual domain of dyspnea. In conclusion, clinically meaningful improvements in the affective and impact domains of dyspnea occurred in response to PR in the absence of consistent physiological training effects.