Lung function after SARS-CoV-2 infection: A prospective cohort study in children.

INTRODUCTION: Although impaired lung function after severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection has been described in adults, it is unclear whether lung function might be altered in children, especially among asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic patients. In this study, we report the results of lung function testing performed after SARS-CoV-2 infection in a large pediatric population. METHODS: The study included 589 patients with previous confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection aged 0-18 years. Both symptomatic and asymptomatic patients during acute infection were enrolled in the study. A spirometry was performed in all cooperating patients. RESULTS: The mean age of enrolled patients was 9.6 years and the mean time from infection to enrollment was 171 days. Spirometry was performed and deemed evaluable in 433 patients. No patient had reduced forced vital capacity (FVC) and only 14 patients (3.2%) had a forced expiratory volume in the First second (FEV1) < 80%. The mean spirometry values recorded were in the normal range. There were no statistically significant differences in spirometry values between patients with respiratory symptoms during infection and those without. Similarly, there were no differences in spirometry parameters according to the time elapsed between infection and enrollment. CONCLUSION: Lung function, according to spirometry values, does not appear to be impaired long after infection in the pediatric population. The presence of respiratory symptoms during SARS-CoV-2 infection would not represent a risk factor for impaired lung function in this cohort of patients.

Lung function and breathing patterns in hospitalised COVID-19 survivors: a review of post-COVID-19 Clinics.

INTRODUCTION: There is relatively little published on the effects of COVID-19 on respiratory physiology, particularly breathing patterns. We sought to determine if there were lasting detrimental effect following hospital discharge and if these related to the severity of COVID-19. METHODS: We reviewed lung function and breathing patterns in COVID-19 survivors > 3 months after discharge, comparing patients who had been admitted to the intensive therapy unit (ITU) (n = 47) to those who just received ward treatments (n = 45). Lung function included spirometry and gas transfer and breathing patterns were measured with structured light plethysmography. Continuous data were compared with an independent t-test or Mann Whitney-U test (depending on distribution) and nominal data were compared using a Fisher's exact test (for 2 categories in 2 groups) or a chi-squared test (for > 2 categories in 2 groups). A p-value of < 0.05 was taken to be statistically significant. RESULTS: We found evidence of pulmonary restriction (reduced vital capacity and/or alveolar volume) in 65.4% of all patients. 36.1% of all patients has a reduced transfer factor (TLCO) but the majority of these (78.1%) had a preserved/increased transfer coefficient (KCO), suggesting an extrapulmonary cause. There were no major differences between ITU and ward lung function, although KCO alone was higher in the ITU patients (p = 0.03). This could be explained partly by obesity, respiratory muscle fatigue, localised microvascular changes, or haemosiderosis from lung damage. Abnormal breathing patterns were observed in 18.8% of subjects, although no consistent pattern of breathing pattern abnormalities was evident. CONCLUSIONS: An "extrapulmonary restrictive" like pattern appears to be a common phenomenon in previously admitted COVID-19 survivors. Whilst the cause of this is not clear, the effects seem to be similar on patients whether or not they received mechanical ventilation or had ward based respiratory support/supplemental oxygen.

Remote monitoring in telehealth care delivery across the U.S. cystic fibrosis care network.

BACKGROUND: Cystic fibrosis (CF) programs and people with CF (PwCF) employed various monitoring methods for virtual care during the COVID-19 pandemic. This paper characterizes experiences with remote monitoring across the U.S. CF community. METHODS: The CF Foundation (CFF) sponsored distribution of home spirometers (April 2020 to May 2021), surveys to PwCF and CF programs (July to September 2020), and a second program survey (April to May 2021). We used mixed methods to explore access, use, and perspectives regarding the use of remote monitoring in future care. RESULTS: By October 2020, 13,345 spirometers had been distributed, and 19,271 spirometers by May 2021. Programs (n=286) estimated proportions of PwCF with home devices increased over seven months: spirometers (30% to 70%), scales (50% to 70%), oximeters (5% to 10%) with higher estimates in adult programs for spirometers and oximeters. PwCF (n=378) had access to scales (89%), followed by oximeters (48%) and spirometers (47%), often using scales and oximeters weekly, and spirometers monthly. Over both surveys, some programs had no method to collect respiratory specimens for cultures associated with telehealth visits (47%, n=132; 41%, n=118). Most programs (81%) had a process for phlebotomy associated with a telehealth visit, primarily through off-site labs. Both PwCF and programs felt future care should advance remote monitoring and recommended improvements for access, training, and data collection systems. CONCLUSIONS: PwCF and programs experienced unprecedented access to remote monitoring and raised its importance for future care. Improvements to current systems may leverage these shared experiences to augment future care models.

An initial evaluation of the safety of a disposable oscillating positive expiratory pressure device in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a sort-term pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Handheld oscillating positive expiratory pressure (OPEP) devices have been a mainstay of treatment for patients with hypersecretory conditions such as cystic fibrosis (CF) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) since the 1970s. Current devices are reusable and require regular cleaning and disinfection to prevent harbouring potentially pathogenic organisms. Adherence to cleaning regimens for respiratory devices is often poor and in response to this, a prototype disposable OPEP device-the 'UL-OPEP' (University of Limerick-Oscillating Positive Expiratory Pressure device)-was developed to mitigate the risk of contamination by pathogens. The device was previously evaluated successfully in a group of paediatric CF patients. The aim of the current study was to initially evaluate the safety of the prototype in patients with COPD over a period of 1 month to ensure no adverse events, negative impacts on lung function, exercise tolerance, or quality of life. Data on user experience of the device were also collected during post-study follow-up. METHODS: A sample of 50 volunteer participants were recruited from pulmonary rehabilitation clinics within the local hospital network. The patients were clinically stable, productive, and not current or previous users of OPEP devices. Participants were invited to use a prototype disposable OPEP device daily for a period of 1 month. Pre- and post-study lung function was assessed with standard spirometry, and exercise tolerance with the 6-min-walk-test (6MWT). Quality of life was assessed using the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), and user experience of the prototype device evaluated using a post-study questionnaire. RESULTS: 24 Participants completed the study: 9 were female. Overall median age was 67.5 years, range 53-85 years. Lung function, 6-min walk test, and SGRQ scores showed no significant change post-study. User feedback was positive overall. CONCLUSIONS: The results indicate that the UL-OPEP is safe to use in patients with COPD. No adverse events were recorded during the study or in the follow-up period of 2 weeks. The device did not negatively impact patients' lung function, exercise tolerance, or quality of life during short term use (1 month), and usability feedback received was generally positive. Larger, longer duration studies will be required to evaluate efficacy. Registration The study was approved as a Clinical Investigation by the Irish Health Products Regulatory Authority (CRN-2209025-CI0085).

Pulmonary function and six-minute-walk test in patients after recovery from COVID-19: A prospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: To study abnormality of spirometry, six-minute walk distance, and chest radiograph among patients recovered from Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS AND STUDY DESIGN: A prospective cohort study was conducted in 87 COVID-19 confirmed cases who recovered and discharged from a medical school hospital in Thailand. At the follow-up visit on day 60 after onset of symptoms, patients underwent an evaluation by spirometry (FVC, FEV1, FEV1/FVC, FEF25-75, and PEF), a six-minute-walk test (6MWT), and a chest radiograph. RESULTS: There were 35 men and 52 women, with a mean age of 39.6±11.8 years and the mean body mass index (BMI) was 23.8±4.3 kg/m2. Of all, 45 cases had mild symptoms; 35 had non-severe pneumonia, and 7 had severe pneumonia. Abnormality in spirometry was observed in 15 cases (17.2%), with 8% of restrictive defect and 9.2% of obstructive defect. Among the patients with an abnormal spirometry, the majority of the cases were in the severe pneumonia group (71.4%), compared with 15.6% in the non-severe pneumonia group, and 10.2% in the mild symptom group (p = 0.001). The mean six-minute-walk distance (6MWD) in the mild symptom and non-severe pneumonia groups was 538±56.8 and 527.5±53.5 meters, respectively. Although the severe pneumonia group tended to have a shorter mean 6-min walking distance, but this was not statistically significant (p = 0.118). Twelve patients (13.8%) had abnormal chest radiographs that showed residual fibrosis. This abnormality was more common in the severe pneumonia group (85.7%) and in others (7.5%) (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Abnormal spirometry was noted in 17.2% of COVID-19 survivors with both restrictive and obstructive defects. Severe COVID-19 pneumonia patients had higher prevalence rates of abnormal spirometry and residual fibrosis on the chest radiographs when compared to patients in the mild symptom and non-severe pneumonia groups.

A comparison of clinic and home spirometry as longtudinal outcomes in cystic fibrosis.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated the transition to telehealth, including the use of home spirometry in cystic fibrosis. Evaluating the accuracy and precision of longitudinal home spirometry is a requisite for telehealth-based research. This secondary analysis of a CF study (eICE) evaluates whether there are cross-sectional or longitudinal differences between home and clinic spirometry. METHODS: Participants age ≥14 years with ppFEV1>25 were recruited from 2011-2015, issued a home spirometer, and asked to complete spirometry efforts twice per week for one year. Clinic spirometry was collected at baseline and every three months. Cross-sectional differences between clinic spirometry and the closest home spirometry measurement were analyzed. Longitudinally, we apply 5 methods to analyze the precision of home spirometry, and differences between clinic vs. home data. RESULTS: Home spirometry is estimated to be 2.0 (95% CI: 0.3, 3.5) percentage points lower than clinic spirometry cross-sectionally. Longitudinally, the estimates of 12-month change in home spirometry varied by analysis method from -2.6 to -1.0 ppFEV1/ year, with precision markedly different. However, home spirometry change estimates were qualitatively similar to the clinic results: -3.0 ppFEV1/year (95% CI: -4.1, -1.9). CONCLUSIONS: To leverage the potential cost, feasibility and convenience of home spirometry, the differences with clinic spirometry must be acknowledged. Significantly lower ppFEV1 in home devices shows that direct comparison to clinic spirometers may induce a spurious change from baseline, and additional variability in home devices impacts statistical power. The effect of coaching, setting, and equipment must be understood to use and improve home spirometry in CF.

Addressing Reduced Laboratory-Based Pulmonary Function Testing During a Pandemic.

To reduce the spread of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, many pulmonary function testing (PFT) laboratories have been closed or have significantly reduced their testing capacity. Because these mitigation strategies may be necessary for the next 6 to 18 months to prevent recurrent peaks in disease prevalence, fewer objective measurements of lung function will alter the diagnosis and care of patients with chronic respiratory diseases. PFT, which includes spirometry, lung volume, and diffusion capacity measurement, is essential to the diagnosis and management of patients with asthma, COPD, and other chronic lung conditions. Both traditional and innovative alternatives to conventional testing must now be explored. These may include peak expiratory flow devices, electronic portable spirometers, portable exhaled nitric oxide measurement, airwave oscillometry devices, and novel digital health tools such as smartphone microphone spirometers and mobile health technologies along with integration of machine learning approaches. The adoption of some novel approaches may not merely replace but could improve existing management strategies and alter common diagnostic paradigms. With these options comes important technical, privacy, ethical, financial, and medicolegal barriers that must be addressed. However, the coronavirus disease 19 pandemic also presents a unique opportunity to augment conventional testing by including innovative and emerging approaches to measuring lung function remotely in patients with respiratory disease. The benefits of such an approach have the potential to enhance respiratory care and empower patient self-management well beyond the current global pandemic.

COPD assessment test for the evaluation of COVID-19 symptoms.

There is evidence to demonstrate the ongoing symptoms of COVID-19; however, there are currently no agreed outcomes to assess these symptoms. This study examined the use of the chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) assessment test (CAT) for patients recovering from COVID-19. 131 patients who were admitted with COVID-19 were followed up over the phone to assess symptoms. The median (IQR) CAT score was 10 (5-16). Cough, phlegm and chest tightness domains were within range for healthy people, but there was evidence of significant breathlessness, loss of energy, and activity and sleep disturbance. The CAT is a useful tool to assess symptoms of COVID-19 recovery.

Practical considerations for spirometry during the COVID-19 outbreak: Literature review and insights.

BACKGROUND: As the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is spreading worldwide, countries are dealing with different phases of the pandemic. Lately, scientific evidence has been growing about the measures for reopening respiratory outpatient services during the COVID-19 pandemic. We aim to summarize the key differences and similarities among recommendations by different national and international organizations. METHODS: We searched on Google and Pubmed for recently published National and International Recommendations/Guidelines/Position Papers from professional organizations and societies, offering a guidance to physicians on how to safely perform pulmonary function testing during COVID-19 pandemic. We also searched for spirometry manufacturers' operational indications. RESULTS: Indications on spirometry were released by the Chinese Task force, the American Thoracic Society, the European Respiratory Society, the Thoracic Society of Australia and New Zealand, the Société de Pneumologie de Langue Française, the Spanish Societies (Sociedad Espanola de Neumologia y Cirugia Toracica, Sociedad Espanola de Alergologia e Inmunologia Clinica, Asociacion de Especialistas en Enfermeria del trabajo, Asociacion de Enfermeria Comunitaria), the Sociedade Portuguesa de Pneumologia, the British Thoracic Society/Association for Respiratory Technology & Physiology, the Irish Thoracic Society, the Sociedad Uruguaya de Neumologia, the Italian Thoracic Society and the Italian Respiratory Society, Cleveland Clinic and Nebraska Medical Center. Detailed technical recommendations were found on manufacturers' websites. We found several similarities across available guidelines for safely resuming pulmonary function services, as well as differences in criteria for selecting eligible patients for which spirometry is deemed essential and advice which was not homogenous on room ventilation precautions. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows a synthesis of national/international guidelines allowing practicing physicians to adapt and shape the way to organize their outpatient services locally. There is generally good agreement on the importance of limiting pulmonary function testing to selected cases only. However, significant differences concerning the subsets of candidate patients, as well as on the management of adequate room ventilation, were observed.

Impact of coronavirus disease 2019 on pulmonary function in early convalescence phase.

OBJECTIVE: This study investigated the influence of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) on lung function in early convalescence phase. METHODS: A retrospective study of COVID-19 patients at the Fifth Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University were conducted, with serial assessments including lung volumes (TLC), spirometry (FVC, FEV1), lung diffusing capacity for carbon monoxide (DLCO),respiratory muscle strength, 6-min walking distance (6MWD) and high resolution CT being collected at 30 days after discharged. RESULTS: Fifty-seven patients completed the serial assessments. There were 40 non-severe cases and 17 severe cases. Thirty-one patients (54.3%) had abnormal CT findings. Abnormalities were detected in the pulmonary function tests in 43 (75.4%) of the patients. Six (10.5%), 5(8.7%), 25(43.8%) 7(12.3%), and 30 (52.6%) patients had FVC, FEV1, FEV1/FVC ratio, TLC, and DLCO values less than 80% of predicted values, respectively. 28 (49.1%) and 13 (22.8%) patients had PImax and PEmax values less than 80% of the corresponding predicted values. Compared with non-severe cases, severe patients showed higher incidence of DLCO impairment (75.6%vs42.5%, p = 0.019), higher lung total severity score (TSS) and R20, and significantly lower percentage of predicted TLC and 6MWD. No significant correlation between TSS and pulmonary function parameters was found during follow-up visit. CONCLUSION: Impaired diffusing-capacity, lower respiratory muscle strength, and lung imaging abnormalities were detected in more than half of the COVID-19 patients in early convalescence phase. Compared with non-severe cases, severe patients had a higher incidence of DLCO impairment and encountered more TLC decrease and 6MWD decline.