Search

Abstract Poor sleep quality is frequent among COPD patients and it has been related to worse outcomes. The objective of this study was to compare the COPD and Asthma Sleep Impact Scale (CASIS) and the generic Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) questionnaires as reliable tools for evaluating sleep quality and its relationship with COPD characteristics and survival. Stable COPD patients were prospectively evaluated. Anthropometric, sociodemographic, comorbidity, lung function and treatment data were collected. All patients completed CASIS and PSQI, mMRC dyspnea severity scale, COPD Assessment Test (CAT), sleep apnoea STOP-Bang and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) questionnaires. Body mass index, airflow Obstruction, Dyspnea and Exacerbations (BODEx) index was calculated. Life status was determined after a mean follow-up of 3.7 (SD 1) years. We included 200 patients, 69.5% male, mean age 65.8 (9) years. Poor sleep was detected in 100 (50%) and 84 patients (42%) according to PSQI and CASIS questionnaires, respectively, with an agreement of 63%. Poor sleep was related to female gender, more severe dyspnea and worse BODEx, HADS and CAT scores according to both questionnaires. PSQI was associated to chronic pain or inferior urinary tract symptoms and CASIS to exacerbations, shorter walked distance in the 6-min walking test and treatment with oral corticosteroids or chronic oxygen. Thirty nine (19.5%) patients died during follow-up. Mortality was not associated to PSQI nor CASIS results. Unlike PSQI, CASIS is more related to COPD severity and its results are not influenced by comorbidities with known impact on sleep quality. In our sample, poor sleep quality was not associated with increased mortality.

Abstract The effectiveness of noninvasive respiratory support in severe COVID-19 patients is still controversial. We aimed to compare the outcome of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia and hypoxemic respiratory failure treated with high-flow oxygen administered via nasal cannula (HFNC), continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) or noninvasive ventilation (NIV), initiated outside the intensive care unit (ICU) in 10 university hospitals in Catalonia, Spain. We recruited 367 consecutive patients aged ≥ 18 years who were treated with HFNC (155, 42.2%), CPAP (133, 36.2%) or NIV (79, 21.5%). The main outcome was intubation or death at 28 days after respiratory support initiation. After adjusting for relevant covariates and taking patients treated with HFNC as reference, treatment with NIV showed a higher risk of intubation or death (hazard ratio 2.01; 95% confidence interval 1.32–3.08), while treatment with CPAP did not show differences (0.97; 0.63–1.50). In the context of the pandemic and outside the intensive care unit setting, noninvasive ventilation for the treatment of moderate to severe hypoxemic acute respiratory failure secondary to COVID-19 resulted in higher mortality or intubation rate at 28 days than high-flow oxygen or CPAP. This finding may help physicians to choose the best noninvasive respiratory support treatment in these patients. Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT04668196.