Back

Functional Capacity and Physical Activity in COPD: Associations with Hospitalizations, Health related Quality of Life and Mortality. A Prospective study

Esteban, C.; Barrio, I.; Aramburu, A.; Monsalve-Cobis, A.; Chasco, L.; Moraza, J.; Najera-Zuloaga, J.; Aizpiri, S.; Aburto, M.; Arostegui, I.; Quintana, J. M.

2026-01-06 respiratory medicine
10.64898/2026.01.04.26343342 medRxiv
Show abstract

ObjectiveTo demonstrate the association between hospital admissions, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), limitations in daily activities, mortality, and survival in relation to physical activity (PA) and functional capacity (FC), which were used together to classify a cohort of COPD patients. MethodsProspective study. Participants were consecutively recruited from six outpatient respiratory clinics of a single university hospital. Data were recorded on sociodemographic and clinical variables, dyspnea (Medical Research Council), HRQoL (Saint Georges Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) and COPD Assessment Test (CAT)), and limitation of daily life (London Chest Activity of Daily Living scale (LCADL)). FC was evaluated with a 6-minute walk test. PA (average daily steps) was measured using an accelerometer. Participants were grouped into four "CanDo/DoDo" quadrants based on their PA and FC combinations. Results401 patients were included. Compared to the "Can/Do" group, the "Cant/Do" (Odds Ratio (OR): 3.34) and the "Cant/Dont" (OR: 27.3) groups had a higher risk of dying within one year, worse survival rates (Hazard Ratios: 2.37 and 2.87), and a higher risk of hospital admission (OR: 2.83 and 2.84) and additional admissions (Incidence Rate Ratios of 2.58 and 2.31) in the first year of follow-up. The "Cant/Do" and the "Cant/Dont" groups had worse scores on the SGRQ (OR: 1.83 and 2.15), CAT (OR: 2.44 and 3.39), and LCADL (OR: 1.31 and 1.42) questionnaires conducted at the beginning of the study. ConclusionUsing PA and FC quadrants to classify participants showed associations with robust outcomes, thus enabling strategies to be developed to improve those outcomes.

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.