A mixed methods study of Aboriginal health workers' and exercise physiologists' experiences of co-designing chronic lung disease 'yarning' education resources.

BACKGROUND: Despite the high incidence of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in Aboriginal communities in Australia, Aboriginal Health Workers (AHWs) have limited knowledge about effective management. AIM: To evaluate an online education program, co-designed with AHWs and exercise physiologists (EPs) or physiotherapists (PTs), to increase knowledge about COPD and its management. METHODS: AHWs and EPs from four Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Services (ACCHS) were recruited. An Aboriginal researcher and a physiotherapist experienced in COPD management and pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) delivered seven online education sessions. These sessions used co-design principles and an Aboriginal pedagogy framework '8 Ways of learning', which incorporates Aboriginal protocols and perspectives to realign teaching techniques and strengthen learning outcomes. Topics covered were: How the lungs work; What is COPD; Medications and how to use inhalers and COPD Action Plans; Why exercise is important; Managing breathlessness; Healthy eating; Managing anxiety and depression. After each session, AHWs with support from EPs, co-designed education 'yarning' resources using Aboriginal ways of learning to ensure topics were culturally safe for the local Aboriginal community and practiced delivering this at the following session. At the end of the program participants completed an anonymous online survey (5-point Likert scale) to assess satisfaction, and a semi-structured interview about their experience of the online education. RESULTS: Of the 12 participants, 11 completed the survey (7 AHWs, 4 EPs). Most (90%) participants strongly agreed or agreed that the online sessions increased knowledge and skills they needed to support Aboriginal patients with COPD. All (100%) participants felt: their cultural perspectives and opinions were valued and that they were encouraged to include cultural knowledge. Most (91%) reported that delivering their own co-designed yarning scripts during the online sessions improved their understanding of the topics. Eleven participants completed semi-structured interviews about participating in online education to co-design Aboriginal 'yarning' resources. Themes identified were: revealing the Aboriginal lung health landscape; participating in online learning; structuring the online education sessions; co-designing with the facilitators. CONCLUSIONS: Online education using co-design and 8 Ways of learning was rated highly by AHWs and EPs for improving COPD knowledge and valuing cultural perspectives. The use of co-design principles supported the cultural adaptation of COPD resources for Aboriginal people with COPD. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42019111405).

Angiotensin receptor blockers for the treatment of covid-19: pragmatic, adaptive, multicentre, phase 3, randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether disrupting the renin angiotensin system with angiotensin receptor blockers will improve clinical outcomes in people with covid-19. DESIGN: CLARITY was a pragmatic, adaptive, multicentre, phase 3, randomised controlled trial. SETTING: 17 hospital sites in India and Australia. PARTICIPANTS: Participants were at least 18 years old, previously untreated with angiotensin receptor blockers, with a laboratory confirmed diagnosis of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection who had been admitted to hospital for management of covid-19. INTERVENTION: Oral angiotensin receptor blockers (telmisartan in India) or placebo (1:1) for 28 days. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary endpoint was covid-19 disease severity using a modified World Health Organization Clinical Progression Scale (WHO scale) at day 14. Secondary outcomes were WHO scale scores at day 28, mortality, intensive care unit admission, and respiratory failure. Analyses were evaluated on an ordinal scale in the intention-to-treat population. RESULTS: Between 3 May 2020 and 13 November 2021, 2930 people were screened for eligibility, with 393 randomly assigned to angiotensin receptor blockers (of which 388 (98.7%) to telmisartan 40 mg/day) and 394 to the control group. 787 participants were randomised: 778 (98.9%) from India and nine (1.1%) from Australia. The median WHO scale score at day 14 was 1 (interquartile range 1-1) in 384 participants assigned angiotensin receptor blockers and 1 (1-1) in 382 participants assigned placebo (adjusted odds ratio 1.51 (95% credible interval 1.02 to 2.23), probability of an odds ratio of >1 (Pr(OR>1)=0.98). WHO scale scores at day 28 showed little evidence of difference between groups (1.02 (0.55 to 1.87), Pr(OR>1)=0.53). The trial was stopped when a prespecified futility rule was met. CONCLUSIONS: In patients admitted to hospital for covid-19, mostly with mild disease, not requiring oxygen, no evidence of benefit, based on disease severity score, was found for treatment with angiotensin receptor blockers, using predominantly 40 mg/day of telmisartan. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04394117.

Asthma and COVID-19 risk: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Individual case series and cohort studies have reported conflicting results in people with asthma on the vulnerability to and risk of mortality from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). RESEARCH QUESTION: Are people with asthma at a higher risk of being infected or hospitalised or poorer clinical outcomes from COVID-19? METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis based on five main databases including the World Health Organization COVID-19 database between 1 December 2019 and 11 July 2021 on studies with a control (non-asthma) group was conducted. Prevalence and risk ratios were pooled using Sidik-Jonkman random-effects meta-analyses. FINDINGS: 51 studies with an 8.08% (95% CI 6.87-9.30%) pooled prevalence of people with asthma among COVID-19 positive cases. The risk ratios were 0.83 (95% CI 0.73-0.95, p=0.01) for acquiring COVID-19; 1.18 (95% CI 0.98-1.42, p=0.08) for hospitalisation; 1.21 (95% CI 0.97-1.51, p=0.09) for intensive care unit (ICU) admission; 1.06 (95% CI 0.82-1.36, p=0.65) for ventilator use; and 0.94 (95% CI 0.76-1.17, p=0.58) for mortality for people with asthma. Subgroup analyses by continent revealed a significant difference in risk of acquiring COVID-19, ICU admission, ventilator use and death between the continents. INTERPRETATION: The risk of being infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 was reduced compared to the non-asthma group. No statistically significant differences in hospitalisation, ICU admission and ventilator use were found between groups. Subgroup analyses showed significant differences in outcomes from COVID-19 between America, Europe and Asia. Additional studies are required to confirm this risk profile, particularly in Africa and South America, where few studies originate.