Search

Introduction: This questionnaire-based epidemiological study was aimed at identifying possible sleep disturbance in a sample of active French males., Methods: Eight hundred and fifty male subjects, aged 22 to 66 years, completed a structured sleep questionnaire supplemented by information about their life habits and medical history. The study compared the prevalence of positive responses between an "at risk" group of sedentary people (with no declared leisure exercise) and a control group of "exercising" subjects (with more than 5 hours of planned exercise weekly)., Results: Among the symptoms suggesting sleep-disordered breathing, only the question "Have you ever been told that you snore?" significantly separated the two groups. In addition, the sedentary group declared a history of treated hypertension significantly more often., Conclusions: The present survey identified only one item that differed significantly between a sedentary of men and an exercising group - a history of treated hypertension. The result may be explained by the limitations of a questionnaire survey and by the limited contrast in exercise practice: the "sedentary" subjects had an occupational labour demand (not quantified), and the control group had a relatively modest leisure physical activity., (Copyright © 2010 SPLF. Published by Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: This study explored the possibility that occupational exposure to low concentrations of carbon monoxide (CO) could influence the synchronisation of upper airway and lower respiratory muscles and thus induce sleep disordered breathing., Methods: Two hundred and thirty subjects exposed to between 1 and 5 ppm (peaks up to 25 ppm) at work and one hundred and sixteen unexposed controls were studied with a protocol comprising anthropomorphic measurements and a self-completed French translation of the Wisconsin Sleep Questionnaire., Results: The two groups had similar anthropomorphic and lifestyle data with the exception that the exposed group were slightly younger (2.5 years). No differences were found in personal or family history, sleep related breathing disorder (snoring, breathing pauses etc) and disturbed sleep., Conclusions: Occupational exposure to low concentrations of CO do not seem to affect ventilatory drive and the synchronisation of upper airway and respiratory muscles during sleep. It should be recognised that these results were obtained by a relatively insensitive technique (questionnaire); a protocol including polysomnography applied to subjects exposed to higher concentrations of CO could lead to other conclusions.

Introduction: As there are important differences in the prevalence of snoring in the literature we have studied this prevalence and the risk factors in a sample of the active male population of Lorraine., Methods: 850 men, aged 22 to 66 tears, volunteered for the study and completed a questionnaire on the frequency of snoring, their lifestyle and their personal and family histories. The usual anthropomorphic measurements were made together with a non-invasive examination of the upper airways., Results: The prevalence of habitual snoring was 34.6%, increasing with age, weight and the derived indices. We identified, by logistic regression, the factors independently associated with habitual snoring in univariate analysis. These were age, weight, nocturnal nasal obstruction, a medical diagnosis of obstructive sleep apnoea, and hypertrophy of the soft palate and uvula. There was evidence that height had a protective effect but exercise activity did not appear to be significant., Conclusion: The 35% prevalence of habitual snoring in our sample of middle aged men is similar to other studies in the literature using the same methods. The present study confirmed that age, weight, girth, nasal obstruction and nasopharyngeal abnormalities are risk factors. The protective effect of height was a new finding not identified in previous studies.

There is no lack of data in the literature reporting on the efficacy of different bronchodilators. However, the discussion concerning the superiority of one bronchodilator over another in patients with chronic bronchitis and airflow obstruction is, and remains, a controversial subject. This has been particularly so since the perfection of synthetic anticholinergics delivered by inhalation without any side-effects. The aim of the present work is to compare the bronchodilator effects of a sympathomimetic, fenoterol (Berotec), and of an anticholinergic, ipratropium bromide (Atrovent), compared to a placebo in twelve unselected chronic bronchitics who had airflow obstruction and were in a stable clinical state. The bronchodilator effect of the two drugs was judged at the same time by variations on forced expired volume (FEV1) which was taken as a reference value, and of the maximum mid-expiratory flow (MEF) measured by spirography and also the variations of pulmonary resistance (delta Rrs) measured by the forced oscillatory method. The comparison of these indices enables the site of action of these agents to be specified. The dose response curve and the duration of action over six hours was assessed for each of the three agents. These were administered in succession and at random over three days by inhalation using an inhalation chamber. All the patients who were included were capable of producing a bronchodilator response but two of them responded only to one agent. The change in the FEV1 was comparable with the two active products. The change in MEF (an index of peripheral airways) was significantly greater following ipratropium.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Two mini-peak flow meters, the Airmed (mini-Wright) and the Medicheck (Pulmonary Monitor), were assessed against a reference electronic spirometer (Spiromatic, based on a pneumotachograph, integrator and an Apple II computer) in a series of 10 healthy subjects and 20 patients with chronic obstructive lung disease. The devices to be tested were mounted in series with the reference instrument; each subject did five trials. It was found that the Airmed instrument overestimated the flows up to 9 l X s-1 (i.e. in patients, average difference 0.86 l X s-1, p less than 0.001; in healthy subjects, average difference 0.35 l X s-1, p less than 0.001). The correlation with the results of the reference instrument was high (r = 0.992) in healthy subjects, whose regression slope was less than unity (0.763). In patients the correlation was satisfactory (r = 0.974), and the slope close to 1 (1.05). The Medicheck overestimated slightly the results of patients (difference 0.17 l X s-1, p less than 0.01); in normal subjects the overestimation was present only below 10 l X s-1 and the difference with the reference instrument nonsignificant (average 0.19 l X s-1). The results were closely related to those of the reference spirometer in both healthy subjects (r = 0.960) and patients (r = 0.936). As for the first instrument the slope of the regression was below 1 in healthy subjects (0.751) and practically one (1.01) in patients.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)