The PRECIS-2 tool has good interrater reliability and reasonable discriminant validity

This work was supported by the Chief Scientist Office (CSO) of Scotland grant CZH/4/773, the UK Medical Research Council and the University of Dundee work through the provision of a stipend for KL and from the Health Services Research Unit at the University of Aberdeen, which is core funded by the CSO of the Scottish Government Health Directories. We are grateful to all the participants who assisted in this study: F Althabe, A-W Chan, D Altman, D Bratton, E Brass, M Campbell, G Forbes, B Gaglio, R Glasgow, H Hobbelen, S Hopewell, J Krishnan, D Riddle, J Segal, D Steinfort, P Tugwell, SN Van der Veer, VA. Welch, C Witt.Peer reviewedPostprin

Confirmatory Spirometry for Adults Hospitalized with a Diagnosis of Asthma or Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Exacerbation

Background: Objective measurement of airflow obstruction by spirometry is an essential part of the diagnosis of asthma or COPD. During exacerbations, the feasibility and utility of spirometry to confirm the diagnosis of asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are unclear. Addressing these gaps in knowledge may help define the need for confirmatory testing in clinical care and quality improvement efforts. This study was designed to determine the feasibility of spirometry and to determine its utility to confirm the diagnosis in patients hospitalized with a physician diagnosis of asthma or COPD exacerbation. Methods: Multi-center study of four academic healthcare institutions. Spirometry was performed in 113 adults admitted to general medicine wards with a physician diagnosis of asthma or COPD exacerbation. Two board-certified pulmonologists evaluated the spirometry tracings to determine the proportion of patients able to produce adequate quality spirometry data. Findings were interpreted to evaluate the utility of spirometry to confirm the presence of obstructive lung disease, according to the 2005 European Respiratory Society/American Thoracic Society recommendations. Results: There was an almost perfect agreement for acceptability (κ = 0.92) and reproducibility (κ =0.93) of spirometry tracings. Three-quarters (73%) of the tests were interpreted by both pulmonologists as being of adequate quality. Of these adequate quality tests, 22% did not present objective evidence of obstructive lung disease. Obese patients (BMI ≥30 kg/m2) were more likely to produce spirometry tracings with no evidence of obstructive lung disease, compared to non-obese patients (33% vs. 8%, p = 0.007). Conclusions: Adequate quality spirometry can be obtained in most hospitalized adults with a physician diagnosis of asthma or COPD exacerbation. Confirmatory spirometry could be a useful tool to help reduce overdiagnosis of obstructive lung disease, especially among obese patients

A Prospective, Controlled Trial of a Protocol-based Strategy to Discontinue Mechanical Ventilation

Weaning protocols can improve outcomes, but their efficacy may vary with patient and staff characteristics. In this prospective, controlled trial, we compared protocol-based weaning to usual, physiciandirected weaning in a closed medical intensive care unit (ICU) with high physician staffing levels and structured, system-based rounds. Adult patients requiring mechanical ventilation for more than 24 hours were assigned to usual care (UC) or protocol weaning based on their hospital identification number. Patients assigned to UC (n ϭ 145) were managed at their physicians' discretion. Patients assigned to protocol (n ϭ 154) underwent daily screening and a spontaneous breathing trial by respiratory and nursing staff without physician intervention. There were no significant baseline differences in patient characteristics between groups

Design of the Subpopulations and Intermediate Outcome Measures in COPD (SPIROMICS) AIR Study.

IntroductionPopulation-based epidemiological evidence suggests that exposure to ambient air pollutants increases hospitalisations and mortality from chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), but less is known about the impact of exposure to air pollutants on patient-reported outcomes, morbidity and progression of COPD.Methods and analysisThe Subpopulations and Intermediate Outcome Measures in COPD (SPIROMICS) Air Pollution Study (SPIROMICS AIR) was initiated in 2013 to investigate the relation between individual-level estimates of short-term and long-term air pollution exposures, day-to-day symptom variability and disease progression in individuals with COPD. SPIROMICS AIR builds on a multicentre study of smokers with COPD, supplementing it with state-of-the-art air pollution exposure assessments of fine particulate matter, oxides of nitrogen, ozone, sulfur dioxide and black carbon. In the parent study, approximately 3000 smokers with and without airflow obstruction are being followed for up to 3 years for the identification of intermediate biomarkers which predict disease progression. Subcohorts undergo daily symptom monitoring using comprehensive daily diaries. The air monitoring and modelling methods employed in SPIROMICS AIR will provide estimates of individual exposure that incorporate residence-specific infiltration characteristics and participant-specific time-activity patterns. The overarching study aim is to understand the health effects of short-term and long-term exposures to air pollution on COPD morbidity, including exacerbation risk, patient-reported outcomes and disease progression.Ethics and disseminationThe institutional review boards of all the participating institutions approved the study protocols. The results of the trial will be presented at national and international meetings and published in peer-reviewed journals

Assessing Asthma Symptoms in Adolescents and Adults : Qualitative Research Supporting Development of the Asthma Daily Symptom Diary

We thank the members of the US Food and Drug Administration’s Qualification Review Team for their feedback during the development of the ADSD. Source of financial support: Funding for this research was provided by the following PRO Consortium member firms: Actelion; Amgen; AstraZeneca; Boehringer-Ingelheim; Forest Laboratories; Genentech; GlaxoSmithKline; Ironwood Pharmaceuticals; Janssen, Merck, Sharp & Dohme Corp.; Novartis; Pfizer; and Sanofi. In addition, Critical-Path Institute’s PRO Consortium is supported by Critical-Path Public-Private Partnerships (grant no. 1U18FD005320) from the US Food and Drug Administration.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Respiratory and Bronchitic Symptoms Predict Intention to Quit Smoking among Current Smokers with, and at Risk for, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

Rationale: Smoking cessation is the most important intervention for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). What leads smokers with COPD to quit smoking remains unknown

Development of Technology of Arsenic Removal from Acidic Waste Solutions in the Form of Arsenic Trisulfide

During the laboratory tests the conditions of arsenic removal from acidic waste solutions of metallurgical enterprise in the form of arsenic trisulfide were determined. The technology based on the reduction of pentavalent arsenic to trivalent state with sodium pyrosulfite solution and following arsenic trisulfide precipitation from acidic solution after treatment with sodium sulfide solution was proposed. The arsenic removal proceeds with mechanical stirring, dosing the calculated amounts of reagents and collecting emissions of hydrogen sulfide. With such treatment, about 95% of arsenic, which was in the initial solution, passes into the precipitate. An enlarged laboratory experiment was carried out and the precipitate with 42.6% of arsenic and 46.9% of sulfur was obtained. The precipitate yield was ∼25.7 kg (dry weight) out of 1 m3 of the initial arsenic containing solution. Keywords: arsenic, arsenic trisulfide, acidic waste solutions, sodium sulfide, sodium pyrosulfit

Stakeholder engagement in eight comparative effectiveness trials in African Americans and Latinos with asthma

BACKGROUND: The effects of stakeholder engagement, particularly in comparative effectiveness trials, have not been widely reported. In 2014, eight comparative effectiveness studies targeting African Americans and Hispanics/Latinos with uncontrolled asthma were funded by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) as part of its Addressing Disparities Program. Awardees were required to meaningfully involve patients and other stakeholders. Using specific examples, we describe how these stakeholders substantially changed the research protocols and in other ways participated meaningfully as full partners in the development and conduct of the eight studies. METHODS: Using the method content analysis of cases, we identified themes regarding the types of stakeholders, methods of engagement, input from the stakeholders, changes made to the research protocols and processes, and perceived benefits and challenges of the engagement process. We used summaries from meetings of the eight teams, results from an engagement survey, and the final research reports as our data source to obtain detailed information. The descriptive data were assessed by multiple reviewers using inductive and deductive qualitative methods and discussed in the context of engagement literature. RESULTS: Stakeholders participated in the planning, conduct, and dissemination phases of all eight asthma studies. All the studies included clinicians and community representatives as stakeholders. Other stakeholders included patients with asthma, their caregivers, advocacy organizations, and health-system representatives. Engagement was primarily by participation in advisory boards, although six of the eight studies (75%) also utilized focus groups and one-on-one interviews. Difficulty finding a time and location to meet was the most reported challenge to engagement, noted by four of the eight teams (50%). Other reported challenges and barriers to engagement included recruitment of stakeholders, varying levels of enthusiasm among stakeholders, controlling power dynamics, and ensuring that stakeholder involvement was reflected and had true influence on the project. CONCLUSION: Engagement-driven modifications led to specific changes in study design and conduct that were felt to have increased enrollment and the general level of trust and support of the targeted communities. The level of interaction described, between investigators and stakeholders in each study and between investigator-stakeholder groups, is-we believe-unprecedented and may provide useful guidance for other studies seeking to improve the effectiveness of community-driven research

Comparative effectiveness research in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease affects millions worldwide. It is America’s third leading cause of death, and results in significant morbidity and cost. Although many therapies exist and are being developed to alleviate symptoms and decrease morbidity and mortality in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, most have only been studied in placebo-controlled efficacy studies in highly selected populations. Comparative effectiveness and translational research in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease will require the development of infrastructures to support collaboration between researchers and the stakeholders who generate, disseminate and use new knowledge. Methodologies need to evolve to both prioritize research questions and to conduct collaborative comparative effectiveness research studies. Given the impracticality of testing every clinical intervention in comparative pragmatic trials for comparative effectiveness research in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, we advocate expanding methodology that includes the use of observational databases with serially performed effectiveness analyses and quasi-experimental designs that include following healthcare changes longitudinally over time to assess benefit, harm, subgroups and cost