Reporting of data on participant ethnicity and socioeconomic status in high-impact medical journals: a targeted literature review.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the frequency of reporting of ethnicity (or 'race') and socioeconomic status (SES) indicators in high-impact journals. DESIGN: Targeted literature review. DATA SOURCES: The 10 highest ranked general medical journals using Google scholar h5 index. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Inclusion criteria were, human research, reporting participant level data. Exclusion criteria were non-research article, animal/other non-human participant/subject or no participant characteristics reported. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Working backwards from 19 April 2021 in each journal, two independent reviewers selected the 10 most recent articles meeting inclusion/exclusion criteria, to create a sample of 100 articles. Data on the frequency of reporting of ethnicity (or 'race') and SES indicators were extracted and presented using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Of 100 research articles included, 35 reported ethnicity and 13 SES. By contrast, 99 reported age, and 97 reported sex or gender. Among the articles not reporting ethnicity, only 3 (5%) highlighted this as a limitation, and only 6 (7%) where SES data were missing. Median number of articles reporting ethnicity per journal was 2.5/10 (range 0 to 9). Only two journals explicitly requested reporting of ethnicity (or race), and one requested SES. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of research published in high-impact medical journals does not include data on the ethnicity and SES of participants, and this omission is rarely acknowledged as a limitation. This situation persists despite the well-established importance of this issue and International Committee of Medical Journal Editors recommendations to include relevant demographic variables to ensure representative samples. Standardised explicit minimum standards are required.

Immediate smoking cessation support versus usual care in smokers attending a targeted lung health check: the QuLIT trial.

OBJECTIVES: Lung cancer screening programmes offer an opportunity to address tobacco dependence in current smokers. The effectiveness of different approaches to smoking cessation in this context has not yet been established. We investigated if immediate smoking cessation support, including pharmacotherapy, offered as part of a lung cancer screening programme, increases quit rates compared to usual care (Very Brief Advice to quit and signposting to smoking cessation services). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a single-blind randomised controlled trial of current smokers aged 55-75 years attending a Targeted Lung Health Check. On randomly allocated days smokers received either (1) immediate support from a trained smoking cessation counsellor with appropriate pharmacotherapy or (2) usual care. The primary outcome was self-reported quit rate at 3 months. We performed thematic analysis of participant interview responses. RESULTS: Of 412 people attending between January and March 2020, 115 (27.9%) were current smokers; 46% female, mean (SD) 62.4 (5.3) years. Follow-up data were available for 84 smokers. At 3 months, quit rates in the intervention group were higher 14/48 (29.2%) vs 4/36 (11%) (χ2 3.98, p=0.04). Participant interviews revealed four smoking-cessation related themes: (1) stress and anxiety, (2) impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, (3) CT scans influencing desire to quit and (4) individual beliefs about stopping smoking. CONCLUSION: The provision of immediate smoking cessation support is associated with a substantial increase in quit rates at 3 months. Further research is needed to investigate longer-term outcomes and to refine future service delivery. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN12455871.

Impact of COVID-19 on people with asthma: a mixed methods analysis from a UK wide survey.

INTRODUCTION: The impact of acute COVID-19 on people with asthma appears complex, being moderated by multiple interacting disease-specific, demographic and environmental factors. Research regarding longer-term effects in this group is limited. We aimed to assess impacts of COVID-19 and predictors of persistent symptoms, in people with asthma. METHODS: Using data from an online UK-wide survey of 4500 people with asthma (median age 50-59 years, 81% female), conducted in October 2020, we undertook a mixed methods analysis of the characteristics and experience of those reporting having had COVID-19. RESULTS: The COVID-19 group (n=471, 10.5%) reported increased inhaler use and worse asthma management, compared with those not reporting COVID-19, but did not differ by gender, ethnicity or household income. Among the COVID-19 group, 56.1% reported having long COVID, 20.2% were 'unsure'. Those with long COVID were more likely than those without long COVID to describe: their breathing as worse or much worse after their initial illness (73.7% vs 34.8%, p<0.001), increased inhaler use (67.8% vs 34.8%, p<0.001) and worse or much worse asthma management (59.6% vs 25.6%, p<0.001). Having long COVID was not associated with age, gender, ethnicity, UK nation or household income.Analysis of free text survey responses identified three key themes: (1) variable COVID-19 severity, duration and recovery; (2) symptom overlap and interaction between COVID-19 and asthma; (3) barriers to accessing healthcare. CONCLUSIONS: Persisting symptoms are common in people with asthma following COVID-19. Measures are needed to ensure appropriate healthcare access including clinical evaluation and investigation, to distinguish between COVID-19 symptoms and asthma.

Patient symptoms and experience following COVID-19: results from a UK-wide survey.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the experience of people who continue to be unwell after acute COVID-19, often referred to as 'long COVID', both in terms of their symptoms and their interactions with healthcare. DESIGN: We conducted a mixed-methods analysis of responses to a survey accessed through a UK online post-COVID-19 support and information hub, between April and December 2020, about people's experiences after having acute COVID-19. PARTICIPANTS: 3290 respondents, 78% female, 92.1% white ethnicity and median age range 45-54 years; 12.7% had been hospitalised. 494(16.5%) completed the survey between 4 and 8 weeks of the onset of their symptoms, 641(21.4%) between 8 and 12 weeks and 1865 (62.1%) >12 weeks after. RESULTS: The ongoing symptoms most frequently reported were: breathing problems (92.1%), fatigue (83.3%), muscle weakness or joint stiffness (50.6%), sleep disturbances (46.2%), problems with mental abilities (45.9%), changes in mood, including anxiety and depression (43.1%) and cough (42.3%). Symptoms did not appear to be related to the severity of the acute illness or to the presence of pre-existing medical conditions. Analysis of free-text responses revealed three main themes: (1) experience of living with COVID-19: physical and psychological symptoms that fluctuate unpredictably; (2) interactions with healthcare that were unsatisfactory; (3) implications for the future: their own condition, society and the healthcare system, and the need for research CONCLUSION: Consideration of patient perspectives and experiences will assist in the planning of services to address problems persisting in people who remain symptomatic after the acute phase of COVID-19.

Physiological demands of singing for lung health compared with treadmill walking.

INTRODUCTION: Participating in singing is considered to have a range of social and psychological benefits. However, the physiological demands of singing and its intensity as a physical activity are not well understood. METHODS: We compared cardiorespiratory parameters while completing components of Singing for Lung Health sessions, with treadmill walking at differing speeds (2, 4 and 6 km/hour). RESULTS: Eight healthy adults were included, none of whom reported regular participation in formal singing activities. Singing induced acute physiological responses that were consistent with moderate intensity activity (metabolic equivalents: median 4.12, IQR 2.72-4.78), with oxygen consumption, heart rate and volume per breath above those seen walking at 4 km/hour. Minute ventilation was higher during singing (median 22.42 L/min, IQR 16.83-30.54) than at rest (11 L/min, 9-13), lower than 6 km/hour walking (30.35 L/min, 26.94-41.11), but not statistically different from 2 km/hour (18.77 L/min, 16.89-21.35) or 4 km/hour (23.27 L/min, 20.09-26.37) walking. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest the acute metabolic demands of singing are comparable with walking at a moderately brisk pace, hence, physical effects may contribute to the health and well-being benefits attributed to singing participation. However, if physical training benefits result remains uncertain. Further research including different singing styles, singers and physical performance impacts when used as a training modality is encouraged. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov registry (NCT04121351).

Moving singing for lung health online in response to COVID-19: experience from a randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Singing for lung health (SLH) is a popular arts-in-health activity for people with long-term respiratory conditions. Participants report biopsychosocial benefits, however, research on impact is limited. The 'SLH: Improving Experiences of Lung Disease trial', a randomised controlled, single (assessor) blind, trial of 12 weeks SLH versus usual care for people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (n=120) was setup to help to address this. The first group (n=18, nine singing and nine controls) started face-to-face (five sessions) before changing to online delivery (seven sessions) due to COVID-19-related physical distancing measures. As such, the experience of this group is here reported as a pilot study to inform further research in this area. METHODS: We conducted semistructured interviews and thematic analysis regarding barriers, facilitators and key considerations for transitioning from face-to-face to online delivery. Pilot quantitative outcomes include attendance, premeasures and postmeasures of quality of life and disease impact (Short Form 36 Health Survey, COPD Assessment Test score), breathlessness (Medical Research Council breathlessness scale, Dyspnoea-12), depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-9, PHQ-9), anxiety (Generalised Anxiety Disorder-7), balance confidence (Activity specific Balance Confidence, ABC scale) and physical activity (clinical visit PROactive physical activity in COPD tool, combining subjective rating and actigraphy). RESULTS: Attendance was 69% overall, (90% of the face-to-face sessions, 53% online sessions). Analysis of semistructured interviews identified three themes regarding participation in SLH delivered face to face and online, these where (1) perceived benefits; (2) digital barriers (online) and (3) digital facilitators (online). Findings were summarised into key considerations for optimising transitioning singing groups from face-to-face to online delivery. Pilot quantitative data suggested possible improvements in depression (treatment effect -4.78 PHQ-9 points, p<0.05, MCID 5) and balance confidence (treatment effect +17.21 ABC scale points, p=0.04, MCID 14.2). DISCUSSION: This study identifies key considerations regarding the adaptation of SLH from face-to-face to online delivery. Pilot data suggest online group singing for people with COPD may deliver benefits related to reducing depression and improved balance confidence.