Introduction: Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) is essential for long-term management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). However, evidence regarding the effectiveness of various PR delivered via telemedicine (tele-pulmonary rehabilitation [tele-PR]) is lacking. This study aims to assess the comparative effects of different tele-PR types on clinical outcomes in patients with COPD. Methods: The following databases were searched: PubMed, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINAHL, and EBSCO Open Dissertations from inception to May 2023. We included randomized controlled trials, quasi-experimental, and cohort studies investigating the effects of tele-PR on exercise capacity. The Cochrane Effective Practice and Organization of Care Group risk of bias was used to assess the quality of included studies. Data were analyzed using STATA 17.0 with a random-effects model. Tele-PR comparisons were ranked using surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA). Results: Seven studies (n = 815) encompassing five tele-PR types were included in the network meta-analysis. Two studies were justified as having a high risk of bias. There were no significant differences among different types of tele-PR and face-to-face PR, in terms of improving the 6-minute walk test. However, the hierarchy estimation suggested that tele-coaching by virtual agents more often than three sessions per week is more likely to be better than other tele-PRs (SUCRA 95.4%). Discussion: While uncertainty persists regarding the optimal tele-PR delivery model, our study suggests that tele-PR was not different from face-to-face PR. However, limited studies and evidence of low-quality underscore the need for well-designed clinical trials to yield more robust comparative evidence.
Keywords: chronic obstructive disease; network meta-analysis; systematic review; tele-pulmonary rehabilitation; telemedicine.