International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary diseaseFeb 5, 2025

Testing a remote software program for lung rehabilitation and monitoring

Long Covid Weekly Brief ↗PubMed ↗DOI ↗OA ↗

Updated Apr 5, 2026

Abstract

Eighty-three percent of participants (40 out of 48) completed the intervention in a study comparing virtual and center-based pulmonary rehabilitation.

A home-based virtual pulmonary rehabilitation (V-PR) program, supported by remote monitoring, was evaluated against traditional center-based rehabilitation (C-PR).
Adherence to the exercise program and educational offerings exceeded 80% in both the V-PR and C-PR groups.
Participants using the virtual platform reported high usability scores for the software.
Significant improvements were observed in walking distance during the for participants in both groups.
Health-related quality of life scores improved significantly for both groups, as measured by the CAT and SGRQ.
No adverse events occurred in either the virtual or center-based rehabilitation groups.

Simplified

OBJECTIVE: Fewer than 3% of adults with (COPD) attend in-person, center-based pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) despite demonstrated health benefits and reduction in mortality. This study evaluated the feasibility and usability of a novel home-based, virtual PR (V-PR) intervention compared to center-based PR (C-PR). The virtual PR intervention was supported by remote therapeutic monitoring (V-PR+RTM; Blue Marble Platform, Blue Marble Health, Altadena, CA). Additionally, we collected data on the to explore the efficacy of the V-PR compared to C-PR.

PATIENTS AND METHODS: Adults with stable COPD referred for PR were recruited. The participants self-selected C-PR or V-PR and were provided a 6-8-week personalized exercise and COPD self-management educational program. In addition, weekly phone contacts with the V-PR group were made. Feasibility was measured using qualitative analysis of adherence, reasons for withdrawal, and self-reported barriers to using the software at home. Usability was measured with the System Usability Scale (SUS). Efficacy was evaluated with the 6 minute Walk Test (6MWT) and various functional performance and patient-centered health-related quality of life (HRQoL) questionnaires.

RESULTS: Forty-eight participants were enrolled, and 40 (83.3%) completed the intervention, n=17 in the C-PR group and n=23 in the V-PR group. Four participants from each group withdrew due to reasons related to health issues (appendicitis, thrush, COVID, back pain) or the health status of their spouse, no-shows, and time constraints. Adherence to the exercise dose (3x/week) and educational offerings were >80% in both groups. Participants in the V-PR group scored the software as having high usability. In both groups, 6MWT distance improved significantly, as did scores on the CAT and SGRQ. No adverse events were reported in either group.

CONCLUSION: A software-enabled virtual PR program with remote therapeutic monitoring is feasible, usable, and effective. It could offer an alternative model that increases PR uptake for those unable or unwilling to attend in-person, center-based PR.

Key numbers

40 of 48 participants

Completion Rate

Participants who completed the intervention

34.0 meters

Mean Improvement in

Change in walking distance for the V-PR group post-intervention

84.1

Usability Score Improvement

Post-intervention System Usability Scale score for the V-PR software

Full Text

We can’t show the full text here under this license.

View Full Text ↗

Testing a remote software program for lung rehabilitation and monitoring

Abstract

Key numbers

Full Text

You found one interesting study. We’ll send the next 7.

what lands in your inbox each week:

Recent issues from the long covid brief

Abstract

Key numbers

Full Text

Related papers

You found one interesting study. We’ll send the next 7.

what lands in your inbox each week:

Recent issues from the long covid brief