Physical Activity Characteristics across GOLD Quadrants Depend on the Questionnaire Used

BACKGROUND:The GOLD multidimensional classification of COPD severity combines the exacerbation risk with the symptom experience, for which 3 different questionnaires are permitted. This study investigated differences in physical activity (PA) in the different GOLD quadrants and patient's distribution in relation to the questionnaire used. METHODS:136 COPD patients (58±21% FEV1 predicted, 34F/102M) completed COPD assessment test (CAT), clinical COPD questionnaire (CCQ) and modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) questionnaire. Exacerbation history, spirometry and 6MWD were collected. PA was objectively measured for 2 periods of 1 week, 6 months apart, in 5 European centres; to minimise seasonal and clinical variation the average of these two periods was used for analysis. RESULTS:GOLD quadrants C+D had reduced PA compared with A+B (3824 [2976] vs. 5508 [4671] steps.d-1, p<0.0001). The choice of questionnaire yielded different patient distributions (agreement mMRC-CAT κ = 0.57; CCQ-mMRC κ = 0.71; CCQ-CAT κ = 0.72) with different clinical characteristics. PA was notably lower in patients with an mMRC score ≥2 (3430 [2537] vs. 5443 [3776] steps.d-1, p <0.001) in both the low and high risk quadrants. CONCLUSIONS:Using different questionnaires changes the patient distribution and results in different clinical characteristics. Therefore, standardization of the questionnaire used for classification is critical to allow comparison of different studies using this as an entry criterion. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01388218

The impact of gravity vs suction-driven therapeutic thoracentesis on pressure-related complications: the GRAVITAS multicenter randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Thoracentesis can be accomplished by active aspiration or drainage with gravity. We investigated whether gravity drainage could protect against negative-pressure related complications, such as chest discomfort, re-expansion pulmonary edema or pneumothorax, compared to active aspiration. METHODS: This prospective, multicenter single blinded randomized controlled trial allocated patients with large free-flowing effusions estimated ≥ 500 mL 1:1 to active aspiration or gravity drainage. Patients rated chest discomfort on 100 mm visual analog scales before, during, and after drainage. Thoracentesis was halted at complete evacuation or for persistent chest discomfort, intractable cough, or other complication. The primary outcome was overall procedural chest discomfort scored five minutes post-procedure. Secondary outcomes included measures of discomfort and breathlessness through 48 hours post-procedure. RESULTS: One hundred forty-two patients were randomized with 140 in the final analysis. Groups did not differ for the primary outcome (mean VAS score difference 5.3 mm, 95% CI -2.4 to 13.0, p = 0.17). Secondary outcomes of discomfort and dyspnea did not differ between groups. Comparable volumes were drained in both groups but procedure duration was significantly longer in the gravity arm (mean difference 7.4 minutes, 95% CI 10.2 to 4.6, p<0.001). There were no serious complications. CONCLUSIONS: Thoracentesis via active aspiration and gravity drainage both appear safe and result in comparable levels of procedural comfort and dyspnea improvement. Active aspiration requires less total procedural time