The illness burden of severe asthma contrasted to people with mild-to-moderate asthma: a qualitative study.

Background: Disabling symptoms of asthma including breathlessness, cough, wheeze and chest tightness largely impact quality of life; however, how these symptoms impact people with asthma of different severity levels remains unknown. This study aimed to compare and characterise patients' symptom experience and the burden caused, their quality of life, and the medication preferences of people with severe asthma against those of people with mild-to-moderate asthma. Methods: This was a multisite qualitative study involving two focus groups and semistructured interviews of adults with severe asthma undertaken in Australia and UK. Interviews were also undertaken in people with mild-to-moderate asthma. Audio recordings were transcribed and analysed thematically. Results: Participants in both severe asthma and mild-to-moderate asthma groups had a mean±sd age of 57±12 years. Between the severe asthma and mild-to-moderate asthma groups, 62% of participants were female and 86% lived with family. Themes were identified: 1) what is asthma and most bothersome symptoms: both groups reported breathlessness as the most bothersome symptom; 2) impacts on life: disease-related impact differed as people with severe asthma reported significant burden in their quality of life, which encompassed emotional, physical, social and financial wellbeing; and 3) personalised and responsive care: severe asthma interviewees preferred injectable biological therapy as a mode of treatment administration. Conclusions: People with asthma are burdened by breathlessness and cough and other disabling symptoms resulting in impaired quality of life. Understanding the experiences of people with asthma of different severities can improve the patient-clinician partnership.

Protocol for a scoping review to map health outcomes in individuals with inducible laryngeal obstruction.

BACKGROUND: Inducible laryngeal obstruction causes narrowing of the laryngeal aperture in response to external triggers. Outcomes are measured in inducible laryngeal obstruction to monitor changes in health status over time. METHODS: This study is a scoping review based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) methodology. The review will be guided by the following research question: 'What health outcomes are measured in studies including people with inducible laryngeal obstruction?' The research question was validated using the Population-Concept-Context framework according to the methodology for Joanna Briggs Institution Scoping Reviews. Relevant peer-reviewed studies and grey literature conducted over the last 40 years will be identified from electronic databases including AMED, CINAHL, Embase, EMCARE, MEDLINE, OVID, PubMed and PsycINFO. The search strings 'inducible laryngeal obstruction', 'ILO', 'vocal cord dysfunction', 'VCD', 'paradoxical vocal fold motion', 'PVFM', 'outcome', 'measure', 'measurement instrument', 'assessment', 'scale', 'questionnaire' will be combined using Boolean logic. An independent reviewer will conduct title screening; two independent reviewers will conduct abstract and full article screening, followed by data extraction by two reviewers. Analyses will be conducted appropriate to the findings. DISCUSSION: The review will document evidence of health outcomes measured in inducible laryngeal obstruction, identifying measurement characteristics and potential utility. Collating studies may identify gaps in coverage, the need for novel tools, and for standardisation for clinical and research purposes. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject Inducible laryngeal obstruction causes narrowing of the laryngeal aperture in response to external triggers. Outcomes are measured in inducible laryngeal obstruction to monitor changes in health status over time. Currently, there are no standardised outcome measures for measuring the effects of interventions in inducible laryngeal obstruction (ILO). What this paper adds to existing knowledge Assessment of health can be measured in a variety of ways. Physiological, radiological and biochemical measurements of impairment are more common historically but there are a lot of outcomes of other factors now including subjective measures of functional status and health-related quality of life, with data collected directly from patients. This study will allow us to scope the literature to see the health outcomes being measured in ILO to attempt to standardise and develop future health outcomes. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? The review will document evidence of health outcomes measured in inducible laryngeal obstruction, identifying measurement characteristics and potential utility. Collating studies may identify gaps in coverage, the need for novel tools and for standardisation for clinical and research purposes.

The multidisciplinary team severe asthma day case assessment and its impact on patient care.

People with severe and difficult to control asthma can be a complex and heterogenous group of patients often with multiple comorbidities. Living with this disease imposes a huge physical and psychological burden upon the patient which requires a comprehensive, systematic and patient-focused assessment, using a wide range of clinical expertise from within the multidisciplinary team. This article describes a severe asthma systematic and multidimensional day case assessment, and the positive benefits that the authors perceive it offers for patient care. These benefits include a confirmed diagnosis, consideration of alternative diagnosis, enhanced adherence, medication optimisation, access to and gatekeeping of high-cost specialist medications, improved patient self-management skills and signposting to appropriate therapies. As a consequence, they believe that this facilitates better patient outcomes through a reduction in corticosteroid exposure, exacerbations and hospitalisation. This severe asthma multidisciplinary team day case approach offers more than just physical benefits when compared with the traditional medical model. Patient feedback reports an excellent patient experience, feeling listened to, understood, empowered and hopeful for the future.

Sex and intimacy in people with severe asthma: a qualitative study.

Introduction: People with severe asthma experience unpredictable daily symptoms requiring an intense treatment regimen impacting on health-related quality of life (QoL). Sexuality contributes to this, yet there is a dearth of research exploring intimacy in people with severe asthma. We aimed to explore the patient's perception of the impact of severe asthma on intimacy, establish their information needs and their perceived role of the healthcare practitioner. Methods: We have performed a qualitative study guided by Interpretive Phenomenological Analysis. We interviewed patients diagnosed with severe asthma recruited from a dedicated clinic using purposive sampling. Interviews were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. Using thematic analysis, the data were analysed for emergent themes. Results: The nine interviews provided unique and detailed insights into their perspectives on how living with severe asthma impinges on sexual intimacy. Four superordinate themes emerged: (1) 'Physical intimacy': including disclosure of physical limitations of severe asthma on intimacy; (2) 'Emotional intimacy': the cyclical impact of the often-negative emotional struggle of living with severe asthma on relationships; (3) 'The role of the healthcare professional': a perceived failure of healthcare professionals (HCPs) to tackle sexual intimacy in consultations and (4) 'Image of self': the reported struggle to deal with negative body image and confusion regarding changing relationship roles. Discussion: This study is the first to explore the impact of severe asthma on intimacy. We suggest an emphasis on education to raise awareness and help HCPs to address this sensitive topic in this cohort and adopt positive strategies to help improve QoL.

A randomised controlled feasibility trial of Group Cognitive Behavioural Therapy for people with severe asthma.

OBJECTIVES: Evidence for the efficacy of Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT) in asthma is developing but it is not known if this translates to benefits in severe asthma or if a group approach is acceptable to this patient group. This study aimed to assess the feasibility and acceptability of Group-CBT in severe asthma. METHOD: This was a two-centre, randomised controlled parallel group feasibility study. Eligible participants (patients with severe asthma and a clinically significant diagnosis of anxiety and/or depression - Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HAD) score greater than 8 for the anxiety or depression sub-scale) received Group-CBT in weekly sessions for eight consecutive weeks and usual care or usual care only. Follow-up was for 16 weeks and end points were: Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire, Asthma Control Questionnaire, HAD, Dyspnoea-12, EuroQual-5D and EuroQuol-VAS. RESULTS: 51 patients were randomised: 36% (51 out of 140) consent rate and attrition at week 16 was 12. Screening logs indicated that study take-up was influenced by patients living long distances from the treatment centre and inability to commit to the weekly demands of the programme. Drop-out was higher in Group-CBT compared due to inability to commit to the weekly programme because of poor health. Participants who contributed to focus group discussions reported that Group-CBT contributed to a better understanding of their illness and related approaches to anxiety management and acceptance of their asthma condition. Although weekly face-to-face sessions were challenging, this was the preferred method of delivery for these participants. CONCLUSIONS: This feasibility study shows that Group-CBT warrants further investigation as a potentially promising treatment option for patients with severe asthma. It has been possible but not easy to recruit and retain the sample. Options for a less demanding intervention schedule, such as less frequent face-to-face visits and the use of web-based interventions, require careful consideration.