Examining Evidence for Conventional versus Complementary Therapies to Address Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Academic Article uri icon

Abstract

  • Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) is currently the third leading cause of death in the United States with mortality rates expected to rise to become the third leading cause of death worldwide by 2030. COPD is characterized by having a persistent airflow limitation that is usually progressive and associated with an enhanced chronic inflammatory response in the airways and the lung to noxious particles or gases [5]. Periodic exacerbations (i.e., a worsening or flare-up) increase the rate of decline in lung function beginning with the second exacerbation, and the rate of decline increases with each severe exacerbation (i.e., requiring hospitalization) thereafter.

    Death from COPD is more likely to occur in the weeks immediately following a severe exacerbation [6]. Therefore, delaying the second severe exacerbation and intensifying in-patient treatment of COPD exacerbations to prevent early mortality are two important strategies for COPD management [6]. The purpose of this paper is to contrast the evidence for conventional therapies such as medications and surgery used to treat COPD with promising complementary therapies. Specifically, this paper will demonstrate that conventional therapies have received more attention in the literature than complementary therapeutic approaches. Thus, more clinical studies are needed to support the further development and use of these innovative treatment approaches.

Publication Date

  • 2016-04-01