Search

Background: Asthma is a chronic airway disease, affecting over 300 million people worldwide. 5–10% of patients suffer from severe asthma and account for 50% of asthma-related financial burden. Availability of real-life data about the clinical course of severe asthma is insufficient. Objectives: The aims of this study were to characterize patients with severe asthma in Switzerland, enrolled in the Swiss Severe Asthma Registry (SSAR), and evaluate predictors for asthma control. Method: A descriptive characterisation of 278 patients was performed, who were prospectively enrolled in the registry until January 2022. Socio-demographic variables, comorbidities, diagnostic values, asthma treatment, and healthcare utilisation were evaluated. Groups of controlled and uncontrolled asthma according to the asthma control test were compared. Results: Forty-eight percent of patients were female and the mean age was 55.8 years (range 13–87). The mean body mass index (BMI) was 27.4 kg/m2 (±6). 10.8% of patients were current smokers. Allergic comorbidities occurred in 54.3% of patients, followed by chronic rhinosinusitis (46.4%) and nasal polyps (34.1%). According to the ACT score, 54.7% had well controlled, 16.2% partly controlled and 25.9% uncontrolled asthma. The most common inhalation therapy was combined inhaled corticosteroids/long-acting β2-agonists (78.8%). Biologics were administered to 81.7% of patients and 19.1% received oral steroids. The multivariable analysis indicated that treatment with biologics was positively associated with asthma control whereas higher BMI, oral steroids, exacerbations, and COPD were negative predictors for asthma control. Conclusion: Biologics are associated with improved control in severe asthma. Further studies are required to complete the picture of severe asthma in order to provide improved care for those patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Lung function impairment persists in some patients for months after acute coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Long-term lung function, radiological features, and their association remain to be clarified. Objectives: We aimed to prospectively investigate lung function and radiological abnormalities over 12 months after severe and non-severe COVID-19. Methods: 584 patients were included in the Swiss COVID-19 lung study. We assessed lung function at 3, 6, and 12 months after acute COVID-19 and compared chest computed tomography (CT) imaging to lung functional abnormalities. Results: At 12 months, diffusion capacity for carbon monoxide (DLCOcorr) was lower after severe COVID-19 compared to non-severe COVID-19 (74.9% vs. 85.2% predicted, p < 0.001). Similarly, minimal oxygen saturation on 6-min walk test and total lung capacity were lower after severe COVID-19 (89.6% vs. 92.2%, p = 0.004, respectively, 88.2% vs. 95.1% predicted, p = 0.011). The difference for forced vital capacity (91.6% vs. 96.3% predicted, p = 0.082) was not statistically significant. Between 3 and 12 months, lung function improved in both groups and differences in DLCO between non-severe and severe COVID-19 patients decreased. In patients with chest CT scans at 12 months, we observed a correlation between radiological abnormalities and reduced lung function. While the overall extent of radiological abnormalities diminished over time, the frequency of mosaic attenuation and curvilinear patterns increased. Conclusions: In this prospective cohort study, patients who had severe COVID-19 had diminished lung function over the first year compared to those after non-severe COVID-19, albeit with a greater extent of recovery in the severe disease group. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Emerging evidence suggests that long-term pulmonary symptoms and functional impairment occurs in a proportion of individuals following SARS-CoV-2 infection. Although the proportion of affected patients remains to be determined, physicians are increasingly being confronted with patients reporting respiratory symptoms and impairment beyond the acute phase of COVID-19. In face of limited evidence, the Swiss Society for Pulmonology established a working group to address this area of unmet need and formulated diagnostic and treatment recommendations for the care of patients with pulmonary long COVID (LC). Method: The Swiss COVID Lung Study group and Swiss Society for Pulmonology (SSP) formulated 13 questions addressing the diagnosis and treatment of pulmonary LC. A survey within the SSP special interest groups involved in care of LC patients was conducted in Switzerland. A CORE process/Delphi-like process was used to formulate recommendations. Forty experienced pulmonologists replied to the first survey and 22 completed the second follow-up survey. Agreement of ≥70% consensus led to formulation of a recommendation. Results: The participants in the survey reached consensus and formulated a strong recommendation for regarding the following points. Patients hospitalized for COVID-19 should have a pulmonary assessment including pulmonary function tests. Symptomatic subjects affected by COVID-19, including those with mild disease, should benefit from a pulmonary follow-up. Persistent respiratory symptoms after COVID-19 should be investigated by a pulmonary follow-up including plethysmography, diffusion capacity measurement, and blood gases analysis. Individuals having suffered from COVID-19 and who present with persistent respiratory symptoms should be offered a rehabilitation. Additional questions were given moderateor weak recommendations for. The panel did not reach sufficient consensus for pharmacological therapy (e.g., therapy specifically targeting lung fibrosis) to formulate recommendations for LC drug treatment. Conclusion: The formulated recommendations should serve as an interim guidance to facilitate diagnosis and treatment of patients with pulmonary LC. As new evidence emerges, these recommendations may need to be adapted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Little is known about geographic differences in health status among patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Objectives: The aim of this study was to examine regional variations in self-reported health status of COPD patients at 7 Veterans Affairs clinics. Methods: The Ambulatory Care Quality Improvement Project was a multicenter, randomized trial conducted from 1997 to 2000 that evaluated a quality improvement intervention in the primary care setting. Four thousand and nine participants with COPD (age ≥45 years) completed the Seattle Obstructive Lung Disease Questionnaire (SOLDQ) and 2,991 also completed the Medical Outcomes Study 36-item short form (SF-36). The unadjusted maximal difference in health status scores is reported as the ratio of the highest and lowest site prevalence. We report the maximal site difference in mean health status scores after adjusting for demographics, comorbidities, utilization, medication use and clinic factors. Results: Subjects were predominantly older (66.5 ± 9.2 years) Caucasian (83.2%) men (97.9%). After adjustment, the maximal site difference for each health status score was significant (p < 0.01) but larger for the SOLDQ (physical 11.2, emotional 9.7, coping skills 7.6) than for the SF-36 (physical component summary 4.7, mental component summary 2.6). Most of the health status variation was explained by individual or clinic level factors, not clinic site. Conclusions: Our models explained <30% of variation in health status measures; therefore, future studies should consider additional predictors of health status such as physical performance, social determinants of health, COPD treatment and environmental factors. Despite its limitations, this study suggests a need to consider regional differences in health status when comparing COPD health outcomes in diverse geographic areas. Copyright © 2010 S. Karger AG, Basel [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]