Bedside Ultrasound Is a Practical and Reliable Measurement Tool for Assessing Quadriceps Muscle Layer Thickness.

Background: Critically ill patients commonly experience skeletal muscle wasting that may predict clinical outcome. Ultrasound is a noninvasive method that can measure muscle quadriceps muscle layer thickness (QMLT) and subsequently lean body mass (LBM) at the bedside. However, currently the reliability of these measurements are unknown. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the intra- and interreliability of measuring QMLT using bedside ultrasound. Methods: Ultrasound measurements of QMLT were conducted at 7 centers on healthy volunteers. Trainers were instructed to perform measurements twice on each patient, and then a second trainee repeated the measurement. Intrarater reliability measured how consistently the same person measured the subject according to intraclass correlation (ICC). Interrater reliability measured how consistently trainer and trainee agreed when measuring the same subject according to the ICC. Results: We collected 42 pairs of within operator measurements with an ICC of .98 and 78 pairs of trainer-to-trainee measurements with an ICC of .95. There were no statistically significant differences between the trainer and trainee results (trainer and trainee mean = -0.028 cm, 95% CI = -0.067 to -0.011, P = .1607). Conclusions: Excellent intra- and interrater reliability for ultrasound measurements of QMLT in healthy volunteers was observed when performed by a range of providers with no prior ultrasound experience, including dietitians, nurses, physicians, and research assistants. This technique shows promise as a method to evaluate LBM status in ICU or hospital settings and as a method to assess the effects of nutrition and exercise-based interventions on muscle wasting.JOURNAL ARTICLESCOPUS: ar.jinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishe

Protocol for the Stather Canadian Outcomes Registry for Chest ProcedurEs (SCOPE)

Introduction The Stather Canadian Outcomes registry for chest ProcedurEs (SCOPE registry) is a Canadian multicentre registry of chest procedures.Methods and analysis The SCOPE registry is designed as a multicentre prospective database of specific bronchoscopic or other pulmonary procedures. Each procedure of interest will be associated with a registry module, and data capture designed to evaluate effectiveness of procedures on relevant patient outcomes. Participating physicians will be asked to enter data for all procedures performed in a given module. The anonymised dataset will be housed in a web-based electronic secure database. Specific modules included will be based on participating physician suggestions, capacity and consensus of the steering committee and relevance of hypotheses/research potential.Ethics and dissemination The central registry is under approval from the Conjoint Health Research Ethics Board at the University of Calgary. We aim for registry data to lead to publication of manuscripts in international medical journals as the primary mode of dissemination. Data may also be used by local investigators for personal and/or institutional quality control purposes as well as to inform health policies. Data requests from non-participating investigators for use under ethics approved research protocols can be considered

Noninvasive Ventilation Practice Patterns for Acute Respiratory Failure in Canadian Tertiary Care Centres: A Descriptive Analysis

BACKGROUND: The extent of noninvasive ventilation (NIV) use for patients with acute respiratory failure in Canadian hospitals, indications for use and associated outcomes are unknown.OBJECTIVE: To describe NIV practice variation in the acute setting.METHODS: A prospective observational study involving 11 Canadian tertiary care centres was performed. Data regarding NIV indication, mode and outcomes were collected for all adults (>16 years of age) treated with NIV for acute respiratory failure during a four-week period (between February and August 2011). Logistic regression with site as a random effect was used to examine the association between preselected predictors and mortality or intubation.RESULTS: A total of 330 patients (mean [± SD] 30±12 per centre) were included. The most common indications for NIV initiation were pulmonary edema (104 [31.5%]) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (99 [30.0%]). Significant differences in indications for NIV use across sites, specialty of ordering physician and location of NIV initiation were noted. Although intubation rates were not statistically different among sites (range 10.3% to 45.4%), mortality varied significantly (range 6.7% to 54.5%; P=0.006). In multivariate analysis, the most significant independent predictor of avoiding intubation was do-not-resuscitate status (OR 0.11 [95% CI 0.03 to 0.37]).CONCLUSION: Significant variability existed in NIV use and associated outcomes among Canadian tertiary care centres. Assignment of do-not-resuscitate status prevented intubation.Peer Reviewe

Lead toxicity, antioxidant defense and environment

Environmental and occupational exposure to a large number of chemicals occurs at various stages throughout human life. Many of these are devoid of toxicity, but some could pose a significant health risk, i.e. the exposure to environmental xenobiotic metals as lead, mercury (Sinicropi et al. 2010a; Carocci et al. 2014), cadmium, etc. In particular, lead has long been a widespread public concern (Basha and Reddy 2010). Lead is one of the earliest heavy metals discovered by men. Due to its unique properties, as low melting point, softness, malleability, ductility, and resistance to corrosion, men have used lead for the last 5000 years in a wide range of applications

The burden of mild asthma: Clinical burden and healthcare resource utilisation in the NOVELTY study

Background: Patients with mild asthma represent a substantial proportion of the population with asthma, yet there are limited data on their true burden of disease. We aimed to describe the clinical and healthcare resource utilisation (HCRU) burden of physician-assessed mild asthma.Methods: Patients with mild asthma were included from the NOVEL observational longiTudinal studY (NOVELTY; NCT02760329), a global, 3-year, real-world prospective study of patients with asthma and/or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease from community practice (specialised and primary care). Diagnosis and severity were based on physician discretion. Clinical burden included physician-reported exacerbations and patient-reported measures. HCRU included inpatient and outpatient visits.Results: Overall, 2004 patients with mild asthma were included; 22.8% experienced ≥1 exacerbation in the previous 12 months, of whom 72.3% experienced ≥1 severe exacerbation. Of 625 exacerbations reported, 48.0% lasted >1 week, 27.7% were preceded by symptomatic worsening lasting >3 days, and 50.1% required oral corticosteroid treatment. Health status was moderately impacted (St George's Respiratory Questionnaire score: 23.5 [standard deviation ± 17.9]). At baseline, 29.7% of patients had asthma symptoms that were not well controlled or very poorly controlled (Asthma Control Test score <20), increasing to 55.6% for those with ≥2 exacerbations in the previous year. In terms of HCRU, at least one unscheduled ambulatory visit for exacerbations was required by 9.5% of patients, including 9.2% requiring ≥1 emergency department visit and 1.1% requiring ≥1 hospital admission.Conclusions: In this global sample representing community practice, a significant proportion of patients with physician-assessed mild asthma had considerable clinical burden and HCRU

The burden of mild asthma: Clinical burden and healthcare resource utilisation in the NOVELTY study

Background: Patients with mild asthma represent a substantial proportion of the population with asthma, yet there are limited data on their true burden of disease. We aimed to describe the clinical and healthcare resource utilisation (HCRU) burden of physician-assessed mild asthma.Methods: Patients with mild asthma were included from the NOVEL observational longiTudinal studY (NOVELTY; NCT02760329), a global, 3-year, real-world prospective study of patients with asthma and/or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease from community practice (specialised and primary care). Diagnosis and severity were based on physician discretion. Clinical burden included physician-reported exacerbations and patient-reported measures. HCRU included inpatient and outpatient visits.Results: Overall, 2004 patients with mild asthma were included; 22.8% experienced ≥1 exacerbation in the previous 12 months, of whom 72.3% experienced ≥1 severe exacerbation. Of 625 exacerbations reported, 48.0% lasted >1 week, 27.7% were preceded by symptomatic worsening lasting >3 days, and 50.1% required oral corticosteroid treatment. Health status was moderately impacted (St George's Respiratory Questionnaire score: 23.5 [standard deviation ± 17.9]). At baseline, 29.7% of patients had asthma symptoms that were not well controlled or very poorly controlled (Asthma Control Test score <20), increasing to 55.6% for those with ≥2 exacerbations in the previous year. In terms of HCRU, at least one unscheduled ambulatory visit for exacerbations was required by 9.5% of patients, including 9.2% requiring ≥1 emergency department visit and 1.1% requiring ≥1 hospital admission.Conclusions: In this global sample representing community practice, a significant proportion of patients with physician-assessed mild asthma had considerable clinical burden and HCRU

Treatable traits in the NOVELTY study

CorrigendumVolume 27, Issue 12, Respirology, pages: 1095-1095. First Published online: November 6, 2022 10.1111/resp.14406International audienceAsthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are two prevalent and complex diseases that require personalized management. Although a strategy based on treatable traits (TTs) has been proposed, the prevalence and relationship of TTs to the diagnostic label and disease severity established by the attending physician in a real-world setting are unknown. We assessed how the presence/absence of specific TTs relate to the diagnosis and severity of 'asthma', 'COPD' or 'asthma + COPD'