The 24h duration of bronchodilator action of the salmeterol/fluticasone combination inhaler

SummaryIntroduction: The duration of bronchodilator action of the long-acting beta agonist salmeterol when administered in the evening has not been investigated. In this study we have investigated whether a single evening dose of salmeterol, administered from the combination salmeterol/fluticasone (SFC) Accuhaler significantly attenuates the circadian rhythm in airway tone over 24h.Methods: Eighteen subjects with mild to moderate asthma (mean FEV1 84% predicted) participated in a double-blind, double dummy, placebo controlled, cross-over study. Subjects inhaled, in random order, placebo, salbutamol (200μg) or SFC (50/100μg) administered in the evening (2000h) on three separate occasions. Lung function measurements including FEV1, specific airways conductance (sGaw) and maximum expiratory flow at 25–75% of vital capacity (MEF25−75%) were assessed at baseline, at 1h and subsequently every 4h post-dose for 24h.Results: Compared with placebo, SFC significantly improved the three measures of airways function throughout the 24h period, with a difference in FEV1 at 24h of 0.24l (0.00–0.47l). SFC abolished the biphasic pattern of the circadian rhythm in airway tone. In contrast, salbutamol had a significant bronchodilator action of 4–8h, depending on the lung function parameter measured.Conclusion: The single evening administration of SFC via the Accuhaler resulted in a duration of bronchodilation of at least 24h, with the abolition of the accentuated biphasic circadian variation in airway tone observed in asthma

Evidence for similarity in symptoms and mechanism: The extra‐pulmonary symptoms of severe asthma and the polysymptomatic presentation of fibromyalgia

Background Asthma is a disease of the lung and a systemic disease. Functional disorders are associated with multiple systemic abnormalities that have been explained by complexity models. The aim was to test the similarity in type and aetiology between the extra‐pulmonary symptoms of severe asthma and the symptoms of fibromyalgia. Methods One Hundred patients recruited from a specialist severe asthma clinic and 1751 people reporting different functional disorder diagnoses recruited via the internet completed the same 60‐item questionnaire. Symptom patterns were compared between groups using a new measure, the symptom pattern similarity index where 0 = no relationship, 1 = identical patterns between groups. Results Severe asthma patients report numerous extra‐pulmonary symptoms. The similarity index between the symptom pattern of the asthma patients with other groups was irritable bowel syndrome = 0.54, chronic fatigue syndrome = 0.69, and fibromyalgia = 0.75. The index between fibromyalgia and asthma patients with the most and least frequent extra‐pulmonary symptoms was 0.81 and 0.55 respectively. Conclusions Patients with severe asthma have numerous extra‐pulmonary symptoms similar in type and pattern to the symptoms of fibromyalgia. The similarity of the symptom pattern between asthma and fibromyalgia increases as the number of extra‐pulmonary symptoms increases as predicted by network theory and previously shown to be the case with other functional disorders. These findings support the hypothesis that functional disorders and extra‐pulmonary asthma symptoms have a common complexity or network aetiology. Evidence based behavioural interventions for fibromyalgia may be helpful for patients with severe asthma reporting extra‐pulmonary symptoms

P196 A new questionnaire to measure quality of life in severe asthma (saq): preliminary validation

Introduction and Objectives Existing HRQoL scales have poor content validity for severe asthma as they fail to measure the qualitatively different burdens experienced by the severe asthma population compared to those with mild or moderate asthma, in particular, the side effects of oral corticosteroids (OCS). A new severe asthma quality of life questionnaire (SAQ) has been designed using extensive patient input in qualitative studies as per FDA guidelines. The questionnaire has 16 questions rated on a 1–7 Likert scale and a 100 point global quality of life scale (GQoL) similar to the EQ-5Ds 100 point visual analogue scale (VAS) (SAQ.org.uk). Methods Consecutive consenting patients attending the severe asthma clinic in Plymouth with severe asthma were invited to participate in a cross sectional survey. Patients completed four questionnaires the SAQ, mini Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (miniAQLQ), Asthma Control Test (ACT) and the EQ-5D. Prednisolone dose and frequency of severe exacerbations were obtained from clinic records. Results 102 participants (64 female, mean age=51 years range 18–79 years), of whom 38 were on maintenance OCS consented to take part, mean FEV1% of 69%. Correlations between the four questionnaires were all above 0.65. Correlations with frequency of severe exacerbations were SAQ 0.31, miniAQLQ 0.31, ACT 0.34. The SAQ’s GQoL correlated with the EQ-5D’s VAS at 0.73. The SAQ was significantly better than the miniAQLQ at predicting the quality of life of patients taking ≥10 mg OCS a day (p<0.05 vs p=0.88). These questionnaires had parallel Results for doses up to 10 mg but above that only SAQ provided differentiation between patients

A qualitative study of the impact of severe asthma and its treatment showing that treatment burden is neglected in existing asthma assessment scales

Background People with severe asthma experience significant respiratory symptoms and suffer adverse effects of oral corticosteroids (OCS), including disturbed mood and physical symptoms. OCS impacts on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) have not been quantified. Asthma HRQoL scales are valid as outcome measures for patients requiring OCS only if they assess the deficits imposed by OCS. Aims The aim of this study was to compare the burden of disease and treatment in patients with severe asthma with items in eight asthma-specific HRQoL scales. Methods Twenty-three patients with severe asthma recruited from a severe asthma clinic were interviewed about the impact of their respiratory symptoms and the burden of their treatment. The domains from a thematic analysis of these interviews were compared with the items of eight asthma-specific HRQoL scales. Results In addition to the burden caused by symptoms, ten domains of OCS impact on HRQoL were identified: depression, irritability, sleep, hunger, weight, skin, gastric, pain, disease anxiety, and medication anxiety. Some patients experienced substantial HRQoL deficits attributed to OCS. Although all HRQoL scales include some OCS-relevant items, all eight scales fail to adequately assess the several types of burden experienced by some patients while on OCS. Conclusion The burden of OCS in severe asthma is neglected in policy and practice because it is not assessed in outcome studies. Existing asthma HRQoL scales provide an overly positive estimation of HRQoL in patients with frequent exposure to OCS and underestimate the benefit of interventions that reduce OCS exposure. Changes to existing measurement procedures are needed

Development of a UK core dataset for geriatric medicine research: : a position statement and results from a Delphi consensus process

Funding AS and MW are funded by the Newcastle National Institute for Health (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centre, which also funded the initial meeting of academic clinicians in geriatric medicine during the Delphi process. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NIHR, the NHS, or the Department of Health. Acknowledgements The authors acknowledge the contributions of members of the UK Geriatric Medicine Core Dataset Extended Working Group.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

How patient participation was used to develop a questionnaire that is fit for purpose for assessing quality of life in severe asthma.

BACKGROUND: Previous research shows that existing asthma quality of life questionnaires fail to measure the burden of oral corticosteroids that can be used to treat severe asthma, and are therefore not fit for purpose for severe asthma according to the USA's Federal Drug Authority's (FDA) criteria for content validity. Patient input and documentation of that input is key to achieving content validity according to FDA guidelines. This paper describes the process of constructing a new questionnaire to measure the burden of asthma symptoms and burden of treatment in severe asthma, using criteria specified by the FDA. METHODS: A draft severe asthma questionnaire (SAQ) was constructed using qualitative input from severe asthma patients who took part in an earlier study. The aim of this study was to improve that draft questionnaire using a further group of patients. In four iterative focus groups, 16 people with severe asthma completed the draft questionnaire, discussed the wording and structure and suggested changes that were incorporated into the final version. RESULTS: The original intention to ask patients to identify whether problems were caused by asthma symptoms or side effects of medication was abandoned as the attribution of cause was found to be difficult and inconsistent. The recall period of 2 weeks was acceptable but fails to reflect the patients' desire to express the variability of severe asthma. Patients suggested improvements to the wording of the draft questionnaire, including splitting some items in two, combining two items in one, and changes to some of the words in individual items and the response scale. CONCLUSIONS: The final version of the questionnaire was substantially different from one constructed using only qualitative reports from patients about the quality of life deficits of severe asthma. Patients make a valuable contribution to the questionnaire if they are asked to comment and improve an initial draft and where patients are treated as partners in the process of questionnaire construction, rather than only as a source of information to experts who construct the questionnaire

New horizons in the role of digital data in the healthcare of older people

There are national and global moves to improve effective digital data design and application in healthcare. This New Horizons commentary describes the role of digital data in healthcare of the ageing population. We outline how health and social care professionals can engage in the proactive design of digital systems that appropriately serve people as they age, carers and the workforce that supports them

Evaluating the Effects of SARS-CoV-2 Spike Mutation D614G on Transmissibility and Pathogenicity.

Global dispersal and increasing frequency of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein variant D614G are suggestive of a selective advantage but may also be due to a random founder effect. We investigate the hypothesis for positive selection of spike D614G in the United Kingdom using more than 25,000 whole genome SARS-CoV-2 sequences. Despite the availability of a large dataset, well represented by both spike 614 variants, not all approaches showed a conclusive signal of positive selection. Population genetic analysis indicates that 614G increases in frequency relative to 614D in a manner consistent with a selective advantage. We do not find any indication that patients infected with the spike 614G variant have higher COVID-19 mortality or clinical severity, but 614G is associated with higher viral load and younger age of patients. Significant differences in growth and size of 614G phylogenetic clusters indicate a need for continued study of this variant

Impact of COVID-19 on cardiovascular testing in the United States versus the rest of the world

Objectives: This study sought to quantify and compare the decline in volumes of cardiovascular procedures between the United States and non-US institutions during the early phase of the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted the care of many non-COVID-19 illnesses. Reductions in diagnostic cardiovascular testing around the world have led to concerns over the implications of reduced testing for cardiovascular disease (CVD) morbidity and mortality. Methods: Data were submitted to the INCAPS-COVID (International Atomic Energy Agency Non-Invasive Cardiology Protocols Study of COVID-19), a multinational registry comprising 909 institutions in 108 countries (including 155 facilities in 40 U.S. states), assessing the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on volumes of diagnostic cardiovascular procedures. Data were obtained for April 2020 and compared with volumes of baseline procedures from March 2019. We compared laboratory characteristics, practices, and procedure volumes between U.S. and non-U.S. facilities and between U.S. geographic regions and identified factors associated with volume reduction in the United States. Results: Reductions in the volumes of procedures in the United States were similar to those in non-U.S. facilities (68% vs. 63%, respectively; p = 0.237), although U.S. facilities reported greater reductions in invasive coronary angiography (69% vs. 53%, respectively; p < 0.001). Significantly more U.S. facilities reported increased use of telehealth and patient screening measures than non-U.S. facilities, such as temperature checks, symptom screenings, and COVID-19 testing. Reductions in volumes of procedures differed between U.S. regions, with larger declines observed in the Northeast (76%) and Midwest (74%) than in the South (62%) and West (44%). Prevalence of COVID-19, staff redeployments, outpatient centers, and urban centers were associated with greater reductions in volume in U.S. facilities in a multivariable analysis. Conclusions: We observed marked reductions in U.S. cardiovascular testing in the early phase of the pandemic and significant variability between U.S. regions. The association between reductions of volumes and COVID-19 prevalence in the United States highlighted the need for proactive efforts to maintain access to cardiovascular testing in areas most affected by outbreaks of COVID-19 infection

Age and frailty are independently associated with increased COVID-19 mortality and increased care needs in survivors: results of an international multi-centre study

Introduction: Increased mortality has been demonstrated in older adults with COVID-19, but the effect of frailty has been unclear. Methods: This multi-centre cohort study involved patients aged 18 years and older hospitalised with COVID-19, using routinely collected data. We used Cox regression analysis to assess the impact of age, frailty, and delirium on the risk of inpatient mortality, adjusting for sex, illness severity, inflammation, and co-morbidities. We used ordinal logistic regression analysis to assess the impact of age, Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS), and delirium on risk of increased care requirements on discharge, adjusting for the same variables. Results: Data from 5,711 patients from 55 hospitals in 12 countries were included (median age 74, IQR 54–83; 55.2% male). The risk of death increased independently with increasing age (&gt;80 vs 18–49: HR 3.57, CI 2.54–5.02), frailty (CFS 8 vs 1–3: HR 3.03, CI 2.29–4.00) inflammation, renal disease, cardiovascular disease, and cancer, but not delirium. Age, frailty (CFS 7 vs 1–3: OR 7.00, CI 5.27–9.32), delirium, dementia, and mental health diagnoses were all associated with increased risk of higher care needs on discharge. The likelihood of adverse outcomes increased across all grades of CFS from 4 to 9. Conclusions: Age and frailty are independently associated with adverse outcomes in COVID-19. Risk of increased care needs was also increased in survivors of COVID-19 with frailty or older age