Non-pharmacological techniques for the extremes of the cough spectrum

Cough can be viewed as a continuum where extremes represent disease phenotypes. Under this unified concept, non-pharmacological treatment for the extremes of the cough spectrum includes both cough augmentation and cough control techniques. Supporting the cough motor output and exercising the cognitive control on coughing are the main directions of these techniques. Cough augmentation can be provided to patients who present low ability to generate adequate peak cough flows, with the aim to develop the sheering forces that are essential for effective airway clearance. On the other hand, individuals with high cough sensitivity or frequency can practice techniques for cough control, which incorporates a combination of education, retraining and psychological support. These techniques aim to empower patients to increase their supramedulary control on cough. Although hypotheses that are generated by the physiology of cough can support most non-pharmacological techniques, their exact mechanisms of effectiveness remain unclear

Current clinical management of smoke inhalation injuries: a reality check

Smoke inhalation injury is a complex clinical condition and respiratory clinicians need to have a good understanding of its current clinical management. However, evidence derives mostly from retrospective cohorts and case series. Is this enough

Physiotherapy in cystic fibrosis Α comprehensive clinical overview

Physiotherapy remains the cornerstone of cystic fibrosis (CF) management alongside medical treatment. Traditionally, physiotherapy intervention focussed on airway clearance during the clinically stable stage and chest infections. Research evidence consistently supports greater mucus clearance with chest physiotherapy compared to cough alone or no treatment. Various methods and techniques of airway clearance have been developed and investigated, and data suggest that most of them are of similar effectiveness. Nowadays physiotherapy management also extends to other areas, supported by studies and clinical practice. The physiotherapists plan, supervise and follow-up systematic exercise or personalised rehabilitation programs, which, similarly to airway clearance, are recommended in all patients with CF. Furthermore, based on a comprehensive assessment, physiotherapists incorporate the management of accompanying musculoskeletal problems such as back pain and postural disorders, as well as urine incontinence issues. In the era that aims to improve quality of life, it is essential that physiotherapists are aware of specific conditions that might affect the management of CF. Their role is to work alongside and within the CF multi-disciplinary team throughout patient’s treatment and consistently support the patient and carers, in particular whilst on clinical pathways of the lung transplantation and palliative care

Patient-managed interventions for adults with bronchiectasis: evidence, challenges and prospects

Bronchiectasis is a chronic lung condition which is characterised by recurrent chest infections, chronicsputum production and cough, and limited exercise tolerance. While bronchiectasis may be caused byvarious aetiologies, these features are shared by most patients with bronchiectasis regardless of the cause.This review consolidates the existing evidence on patient-managed interventions for adults withbronchiectasis, while also outlining areas for future research. Airway clearance techniques andhyperosmolar agents are key components of the bronchiectasis management and consistently recommendedfor clinical implementation. Questions around their prescription, such as optimal sequence of delivery, arestill to be answered. Pulmonary rehabilitation and exercise are also recommended for patients withbronchiectasis. Relatively strong evidence underpins this recommendation during a clinically stable stage ofthe disease, although the role of pulmonary rehabilitation following an exacerbation is still unclear.Additionally, self-management programmes feature prominently in bronchiectasis treatment, yet the lack ofconsensus regarding their definition and outcomes presents hurdles to establishing a cohesive evidencebase. Moreover, cough, a cardinal symptom of bronchiectasis, warrants closer examination. Althoughmanaging cough in bronchiectasis may initially appear risky, further research is necessary to ascertainwhether strategies employed in other respiratory conditions can be safely and effectively adapted tobronchiectasis, particularly through identifying patient responder populations and criteria where cough maynot enhance airway clearance efficacy and its control is needed. Overall, there is a growing recognition ofthe importance of patient-managed interventions in the bronchiectasis management. Efforts to improveresearch methodologies and increase research funding are needed to further advance our understanding ofthese interventions, and their role in optimising patient care and outcomes

Development and initial validation of the bronchiectasis exacerbation and symptom tool (BEST)

BACKGROUND: Recurrent bronchiectasis exacerbations are related to deterioration of lung function, progression of the disease, impairment of quality of life, and to an increased mortality. Improved detection of exacerbations has been accomplished in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease through the use of patient completed diaries. These tools may enhance exacerbation reporting and identification. The aim of this study was to develop a novel symptom diary for bronchiectasis symptom burden and detection of exacerbations, named the BEST diary. METHODS: Prospective observational study of patients with bronchiectasis conducted at Ninewells Hospital, Dundee. We included patients with confirmed bronchiectasis by computed tomography, who were symptomatic and had at least 1 documented exacerbation of bronchiectasis in the previous 12\u2009months to participate. Symptoms were recorded daily in a diary incorporating cough, sputum volume, sputum colour, dyspnoea, fatigue and systemic disturbance scored from 0 to 26. RESULTS: Twenty-one patients were included in the study. We identified 29 reported (treated exacerbations) and 23 unreported (untreated) exacerbations over 6-month follow-up. The BEST diary score showed a good correlation with the established and validated questionnaires and measures of health status (COPD Assessment Test, r =\u20090.61, p =\u20090.0037, Leicester Cough Questionnaire, r =\u2009-\u20090.52,p =\u20090.0015, St Georges Respiratory Questionnaire, r =\u20090.61,p <\u20090.0001 and 6\u2009min walk test, r =\u2009-\u20090.46,p =\u20090.037). The mean BEST score at baseline was 7.1 points (SD 2.2). The peak symptom score during exacerbation was a mean of 16.4 (3.1), and the change from baseline to exacerbation was a mean of 9.1 points (SD 2.5). Mean duration of exacerbations based on time for a return to baseline symptoms was 15.3\u2009days (SD 5.7). A minimum clinically important difference of 4 points is proposed. CONCLUSIONS: The BEST symptom diary has shown concurrent validity with current health questionnaires and is responsive at onset and recovery from exacerbation. The BEST diary may be useful to detect and characterise exacerbations in bronchiectasis clinical trials

Psychometrics of HRQoL questionnaires in bronchiectasis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION: Understanding the psychometric properties of health related quality of life (HRQoL) questionnaires can help inform selection in clinical trials. OBJECTIVE: To assess the psychometric properties of HRQoL questionnaires in bronchiectasis. METHODS: A literature search was conducted. HRQoL questionnaires were assessed for psychometric properties (reliability, validity, minimal clinically important difference (MCID), floor/ceiling effects). Meta-analyses assessed the associations of HRQoL with clinical measures and responsiveness of HRQoL in clinical trials. RESULTS: 166 studies and 12 HRQoL questionnaires were included. The BHQ, LCQ, CAT and SF-36 had good internal consistency in all domains reported (Cronbach's α≥0.7) across all studies and the QoL-B, SGRQ, CRDQ and SOLQ had good internal consistency in all domains in the majority of (but not all) studies. The BHQ, SGRQ, LCQ and CAT had good test-retest reliability in all domains reported ((intraclass correlation coefficient) ICC ≥0.7) across all studies and the QoL-B, CRDQ and SOLQ had good test-retest reliability in all domains in the majority of (but not all) studies. HRQoL questionnaires were able to discriminate between demographics, important markers of clinical status, disease severity, exacerbations and bacteriology. For HRQoL responsiveness, there was a difference between the treatment and placebo effect. CONCLUSION: SGRQ was the most widely used HRQoL questionnaire in bronchiectasis studies and it had good psychometric properties, however good psychometric data are growing on bronchiectasis specific HRQoL questionnaires, QoL-B and BHQ. Future studies should focus on the medium-long term test-retest reliability, responsiveness and MCID in these HRQoL questionnaires which show potential in bronchiectasis

The IMPROVE trial: study protocol for a pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial to assess the effectiveness of using lay health workers to improve uptake and completion of pulmonary rehabilitation in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) is a programme of exercise and education and the most effective treatment for the symptoms and disability associated with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. However, the benefits of PR are limited by poor uptake and completion. This trial will determine whether using trained volunteer lay health workers, called "PR buddies," improves uptake and completion of PR and is cost-effective. This trial protocol outlines the methods for evaluating effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and acceptability. METHODS: The IMPROVE trial is a pragmatic, open, cluster randomised controlled trial planned in 38 PR services across England and Wales. PR services will be randomised to either intervention arm-offering support from PR buddies to patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease-or to usual care as the control arm. PR staff in trial sites randomised to the intervention arm will receive training in recruiting and training PR buddies. They will deliver training to volunteers, recruited from among people who have recently completed PR in their service. The 3-day PR-buddy training programme covers communication skills, confidentiality, boundaries of the PR-buddy role and behaviour change techniques to help patients overcome obstacles to attending PR. An internal pilot will test the implementation of the trial in eight sites (four intervention sites and four in control arm). The primary outcome of the trial is the uptake and completion of PR. A process evaluation will investigate the acceptability of the intervention to patients, PR staff and the volunteer PR buddies, and intervention fidelity. We will also conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis. DISCUSSION: Improving outcomes for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and access to PR are priorities for the UK National Health Service (NHS) in its long-term plan. The trial hypothesis is that volunteer PR buddies, who are recruited and trained by local PR teams, are an effective and cost-effective way to improve the uptake and completion rates of PR. The trial is pragmatic, since it will test whether the intervention can be incorporated into NHS PR services. Information obtained in this trial may be used to influence policy on the use of PR buddies in PR and other similar services in the NHS. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN12658458. Registered on 23/01/2023

The Objective Assessment of Cough Frequency in Bronchiectasis.

INTRODUCTION: Cough in bronchiectasis is associated with significant impairment in health status. This study aimed to quantify cough frequency objectively with a cough monitor and investigate its relationship with health status. A secondary aim was to identify clinical predictors of cough frequency. METHODS: Fifty-four patients with bronchiectasis were compared with thirty-five healthy controls. Objective 24-h cough, health status (cough-specific: Leicester Cough Questionnaire LCQ and bronchiectasis specific: Bronchiectasis Health Questionnaire BHQ), cough severity and lung function were measured. The clinical predictors of cough frequency in bronchiectasis were determined in a multivariate analysis. RESULTS: Objective cough frequency was significantly raised in patients with bronchiectasis compared to healthy controls [geometric mean (standard deviation)] 184.5 (4.0) vs. 20.6 (3.2) coughs/24-h; mean fold-difference (95% confidence interval) 8.9 (5.2, 15.2); p < 0.001 and they had impaired health status. There was a significant correlation between objective cough frequency and subjective measures; LCQ r = -0.52 and BHQ r = -0.62, both p < 0.001. Sputum production, exacerbations (between past 2 weeks to 12 months) and age were significantly associated with objective cough frequency in multivariate analysis, explaining 52% of the variance (p < 0.001). There was no statistically significant association between cough frequency and lung function. CONCLUSIONS: Cough is a common and significant symptom in patients with bronchiectasis. Sputum production, exacerbations and age, but not lung function, were independent predictors of cough frequency. Ambulatory objective cough monitoring provides novel insights and should be further investigated as an outcome measure in bronchiectasis

Bronchiectasis insanity:Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results?

Bronchiectasis is an increasingly common disease with a significant impact on quality of life and morbidity of affected patients. It is also a very heterogeneous disease with numerous different underlying etiologies and presentations. Most treatments for bronchiectasis are based on low-quality evidence; consequently, no treatments have been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration or the European Medicines Agency for the treatment of bronchiectasis. The last several years have seen numerous clinical trials in which the investigational agent, thought to hold great promise, did not demonstrate a clinically or statistically significant benefit. This commentary will review the likely reasons for these disappointing results and a potential approach that may have a greater likelihood of defining evidence-based treatment for bronchiectasis