Understanding the necessity for therapies to manage chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) depends heavily on literature synthesis. Literature synthesis provides healthcare practitioners with a thorough understanding of the efficacy of treatments like nutritional assistance and telemedicine by methodically evaluating and assessing previous studies. Literature synthesis aids in identifying the most promising methods to enhance lung function and lower readmissions since COPD is a complicated illness requiring various therapies. The literature will be analyzed and synthesized to address the problem of COPD and evaluate different approaches present in the PICOT question which is as follows:

“In patients diagnosed with COPD (P), how do nutritional and telehealth interventions

(I) compared to standard care without nutritional and telehealth interventions improve lung functioning and reduced readmission (O) in the time period of 2 to 3 months (T)”?

It is feasible to assess the overall effectiveness of these therapies and identify knowledge gaps that need more research by combining data from several studies. Additionally, literature synthesis offers a solid basis for evidence-based practice, empowering medical professionals to make wise choices and provide COPD patients with the best treatment possible (Ahmadi et al., 2020).

Literature Search Strategy

A thorough literature search method was used to research the PICOT issue regarding interventions for COPD. Relevant keywords included in the search phrases were “COPD,” “chronic obstructive pulmonary disease,” “nutritional interventions,” “telehealth interventions,” “lung function,” “readmission,” and “standard care”. Boolean operators like “AND” and “OR” were used to combine these phrases to narrow the search. MeSH, or medical topic headings, strengthened the search method even further. To find research indexed with these particular criteria in medical databases, MeSH terms like “Pulmonary Disease”, “Chronic Obstructive,” “Nutritional Support,” and “Telemedicine” were included. To find relevant publications from the reference lists of included studies and systematic reviews, manual searches were carried out in addition to scanning electronic databases, including PubMed, MEDLINE, and Embase. This additional effort facilitated the screening of new sources that may have been inadvertently missed during the original search process (Chahdi et al., 2023).

The number of items discovered during the thorough search was noted, and these items comprised a mix of published research, systematic reviews, official publications, and pertinent dissertations or thesis reports. Based on predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria, these compositions were then screened. Studies that compared nutritional and telehealth therapies to standard care without these interventions and evaluated lung performance and readmission as outcomes were required to be completed within 2 to 3 months to meet the inclusion criteria. Studies that did not fit these requirements or were not in English were disqualified. After the screening procedure, 30 parts were kept for further examination (Deutz et al., 2020). These articles were chosen based on the study’s design, the strength of the evidence presented, and their applicability to the research topic.

To guarantee a thorough grasp of the body of literature, systematic reviews were included, and the policy implications of government publications were taken into account. It was included in a dissertation or thesis report that satisfied the requirements and offered distinctive insights or viewpoints. A robust and representative body of evidence was created for the research on the PICOT question related to interventions for COPD by using a thorough literature search strategy, including various sources beyond published studies and applying strict inclusion and exclusion criteria. The final selection of 30 retained pieces was made possible by these methods (Furulund et al., 2021).

Analysis of Literature

Comparing the efficacy of dietary and telehealth therapies to that of conventional care was the subject of the study on interventions for COPD. The analysis of the literature that was kept for the research on interventions for COPD offered valuable insights into the effectiveness of these interventions. The chosen papers represented various research methodologies, such as randomized controlled trials, observational studies, systematic reviews, and official government publications. Because the retained papers provided a comprehensive understanding of the benefits, limitations, and implementation strategies associated with these therapies, t