ABSTRACT
<p><b>BACKGROUND</b>The Borg scale is most commonly used to measure dyspnea in China. However, many patients that find it is difficult to distinguish the labeled numbers corresponding to different dyspnea scores. We developed a new method to rate dyspnea, which we call the count scale (CS). It includes the count scale number (CSN) and count scale time (CST). The aims of the present study were to determine the reproducibility and sensitivity of the CS during exercise in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).</p><p><b>METHODS</b>Fourteen male patients with COPD (aged 58.00 ± 7.72 years) participated in this study. A progressive incremental exercise and a 6-minute constant work exercise test were performed every 2 to 3 days for a total of 3 times. The CS results were evaluated at rest and at 30% and 70% of maximal workload (Wmax) and Wmax. The Borg scales were obtained during exercise.</p><p><b>RESULTS</b>No significant differences occurred across the three trials during exercise for the CS and Borg scores. The CSN and CST were more varied at Wmax (coefficient of variation (CV) = (22.28 ± 16.96)% for CSN, CV = (23.08 ± 19.11)% for CST) compared to 30% of Wmax (CV = (11.92 ± 8.78)% for CSN, CV = (11.16 ± 9.96)% for CST) and 70% of Wmax (CV = (9.08 ± 7.09)% for CSN, CV = (12.19 ± 12.32)% for CST). Dyspnea ratings with either CSN or CST tended to decrease at the higher workload compared to the lower workload. CSN and CST scores were highly correlated (r = 0.861, P < 0.001). CSN was negatively correlated with Borg scores (r = -0.363, P = 0.001). Similar results were obtained for the relationship between CST and Borg scores (r = -0.345, P = 0.003).</p><p><b>CONCLUSION</b>We concluded that the CS is simple and reproducible when measuring dyspnea during exercise in patients with COPD.</p>
Subject(s)
Aged , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Dyspnea , Diagnosis , Exercise , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive , Reproducibility of ResultsABSTRACT
<p><b>BACKGROUND</b>Although severe encephalopathy has been proposed as a possible contraindication to the use of noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation (NPPV), increasing clinical reports showed it was effective in patients with impaired consciousness and even coma secondary to acute respiratory failure, especially hypercapnic acute respiratory failure (HARF). To further evaluate the effectiveness and safety of NPPV for severe hypercapnic encephalopathy, a prospective case-control study was conducted at a university respiratory intensive care unit (RICU) in patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) during the past 3 years.</p><p><b>METHODS</b>Forty-three of 68 consecutive AECOPD patients requiring ventilatory support for HARF were divided into 2 groups, which were carefully matched for age, sex, COPD course, tobacco use and previous hospitalization history, according to the severity of encephalopathy, 22 patients with Glasgow coma scale (GCS) < 10 served as group A and 21 with GCS = 10 as group B.</p><p><b>RESULTS</b>Compared with group B, group A had a higher level of baseline arterial partial CO2 pressure ((102 +/- 27) mmHg vs (74 +/- 17) mmHg, P < 0.01), lower levels of GCS (7.5 +/- 1.9 vs 12.2 +/- 1.8, P < 0.01), arterial pH value (7.18 +/- 0.06 vs 7.28 +/- 0.07, P < 0.01) and partial O(2) pressure/fraction of inspired O(2) ratio (168 +/- 39 vs 189 +/- 33, P < 0.05). The NPPV success rate and hospital mortality were 73% (16/22) and 14% (3/22) respectively in group A, which were comparable to those in group B (68% (15/21) and 14% (3/21) respectively, all P > 0.05), but group A needed an average of 7 cm H2O higher of maximal pressure support during NPPV, and 4, 4 and 7 days longer of NPPV time, RICU stay and hospital stay respectively than group B (P < 0.05 or P < 0.01). NPPV therapy failed in 12 patients (6 in each group) because of excessive airway secretions (7 patients), hemodynamic instability (2), worsening of dyspnea and deterioration of gas exchange (2), and gastric content aspiration (1).</p><p><b>CONCLUSIONS</b>Selected patients with severe hypercapnic encephalopathy secondary to HARF can be treated as effectively and safely with NPPV as awake patients with HARF due to AECOPD; a trial of NPPV should be instituted to reduce the need of endotracheal intubation in patients with severe hypercapnic encephalopathy who are otherwise good candidates for NPPV due to AECOPD.</p>