The role and response of primary healthcare services in the delivery of palliative care in epidemics and pandemics : a rapid review to inform practice and service delivery during the COVID-19 pandemic

Background: The increased number of deaths in the community happening as a result of COVID-19 has caused primary healthcare services to change their traditional service delivery in a short timeframe. Services are quickly adapting to new challenges in the practical delivery of end-of-life care to patients in the community including through virtual consultations and in the provision of timely symptom control. Aim: To synthesise existing evidence related to the delivery of palliative and end-of-life care by primary healthcare professionals in epidemics and pandemics. Design: Rapid systematic review using modified systematic review methods, with narrative synthesis of the evidence. Data sources: Searches were carried out in Medline, Embase, PsychINFO, CINAHL and Web of Science on 7th March 2020. Results: Only five studies met the inclusion criteria, highlighting a striking lack of evidence base for the response of primary healthcare services in palliative care during epidemics and pandemics. All were observational studies. Findings were synthesised using a pandemic response framework according to ‘systems’ (community providers feeling disadvantaged in terms of receiving timely information and protocols), ‘space’ (recognised need for more care in the community), ‘staff’ (training needs and resilience) and ‘stuff’ (other aspects of managing care in pandemics including personal protective equipment, cleaning care settings and access to investigations). Conclusions: As the COVID-19 pandemic progresses, there is an urgent need for research to provide increased understanding of the role of primary care and community nursing services in palliative care, alongside hospices and community specialist palliative care providers

Pulmonary and respiratory muscle function in response to 10 marathons in 10 days

Purpose: Marathon and ultramarathon provoke respiratory muscle fatigue and pulmonary dysfunction; nevertheless, it is unknown how the respiratory system responds to multiple, consecutive days of endurance exercise. Methods: Nine trained individuals (six male) contested 10 marathons in 10 consecutive days. Respiratory muscle strength (maximum static inspiratory and expiratory mouth-pressures), pulmonary function (spirometry), perceptual ratings of respiratory muscle soreness (Visual Analogue Scale), breathlessness (dyspnea, modified Borg CR10 scale), and symptoms of Upper Respiratory Tract Infection (URTI), were assessed before and after marathons on days 1, 4, 7, and 10. Results: Group mean time for 10 marathons was 276 ± 35 min. Relative to pre-challenge baseline (159 ± 32 cmH2O), MEP was reduced after day 1 (136 ± 31 cmH2O, p = 0.017), day 7 (138 ± 42 cmH2O, p = 0.035), and day 10 (130 ± 41 cmH2O, p = 0.008). There was no change in pre-marathon MEP across days 1, 4, 7, or 10 (p > 0.05). Pre-marathon forced vital capacity was significantly diminished at day 4 (4.74 ± 1.09 versus 4.56 ± 1.09 L, p = 0.035), remaining below baseline at day 7 (p = 0.045) and day 10 (p = 0.015). There were no changes in FEV1, FEV1/FVC, PEF, MIP, or respiratory perceptions during the course of the challenge (p > 0.05). In the 15-day post-challenge period, 5/9 (56%) runners reported symptoms of URTI, relative to 1/9 (11%) pre-challenge. Conclusions: Single-stage marathon provokes acute expiratory muscle fatigue which may have implications for health and/or performance, but 10 consecutive days of marathon running does not elicit cumulative (chronic) changes in respiratory function or perceptions of dyspnea. These data allude to the robustness of the healthy respiratory system