Breathing pattern disorder in chronic rhinosinusitis with severe asthma: nasal obstruction and polyps do not increase prevalence.

OBJECTIVES: Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) with severe asthma are associated with breathing pattern disorder (BPD). Mouth breathing is a sign of breathing pattern disorder, and nose breathing a fundamental part of breathing pattern retraining for BPD. The prevalence of BPD in relation to CRS subtypes and the relationship of nasal obstruction to BPD in CRS and associated severe asthma is unknown. The breathing pattern assessment tool (BPAT) can identify BPD. Our objective was to thus investigate the prevalence of BPD, nasal airflow obstruction and measures of airway disease severity in CRS with (CRSwNP) and without nasal polyps (CRSsNP) in severe asthma. METHODS: We determined whether CRS status, peak nasal inspiratory flow (PNIF) or polyp disease increased BPD prevalence. Demographic factors, measures of airway function and breathlessness in relation to BPD status and CRS subtypes were also evaluated. RESULTS: 130 Patients were evaluated (n = 69 had BPD). The prevalence of BPD in CRS with severe asthma was 53.1%. There was no difference between BPD occurrence between CRSwNP and CRSsNP. The mean polyp grade and PNIF were not statistically different between the BPD and non-BPD group. The presence of nasal polyps did not increase breathlessness. CONCLUSIONS: BPD and CRS are commonly co-associated. CRS status and nasal obstruction per se does not increase BPD prevalence.

Post-COVID-19 assessment in a specialist clinical service: a 12-month, single-centre, prospective study in 1325 individuals.

INTRODUCTION: Post-COVID-19 complications require simultaneous characterisation and management to plan policy and health system responses. We describe the 12-month experience of the first UK dedicated post-COVID-19 clinical service to include hospitalised and non-hospitalised patients. METHODS: In a single-centre, observational analysis, we report the demographics, symptoms, comorbidities, investigations, treatments, functional recovery, specialist referral and rehabilitation of 1325 individuals assessed at the University College London Hospitals post-COVID-19 service between April 2020 and April 2021, comparing by referral route: posthospitalised (PH), non-hospitalised (NH) and post emergency department (PED). Symptoms associated with poor recovery or inability to return to work full time were assessed using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: 1325 individuals were assessed (PH: 547, 41.3%; PED: 212, 16%; NH: 566, 42.7%). Compared with the PH and PED groups, the NH group were younger (median 44.6 (35.6-52.8) years vs 58.3 (47.0-67.7) years and 48.5 (39.4-55.7) years), more likely to be female (68.2%, 43.0% and 59.9%), less likely to be of ethnic minority (30.9%, 52.7% and 41.0%) or seen later after symptom onset (median (IQR): 194 (118-298) days, 69 (51-111) days and 76 (55-128) days; all p<0.0001). All groups had similar rates of onward specialist referral (NH 18.7%, PH 16.1% and PED 18.9%, p=0.452) and were more likely to require support for breathlessness (23.7%, 5.5% and 15.1%, p<0.001) and fatigue (17.8%, 4.8% and 8.0%, p<0.001). Hospitalised patients had higher rates of pulmonary emboli, persistent lung interstitial abnormalities and other organ impairment. 716 (54.0%) individuals reported <75% optimal health (median 70%, IQR 55%-85%). Less than half of employed individuals could return to work full time at first assessment. CONCLUSION: Post-COVID-19 symptoms were significant in PH and NH patients, with significant ongoing healthcare needs and utilisation. Trials of interventions and patient-centred pathways for diagnostic and treatment approaches are urgently required.

Chronic rhinosinusitis with and without nasal polyps and asthma: Omalizumab improves residual anxiety but not depression.

BACKGROUND: Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) has a high prevalence of anxiety and depression. It is currently uncertain if treatment in patients with CRS with or without nasal polyps (CRSwNP and CRSsNP) has any impact on improving mental health outcomes. The aims here were to document anxiety and depression in patients with severe CRS and asthma already treated with appropriate medical therapy. We then evaluated whether further maximal treatment with omalizumab improved anxiety and/or depression alongside improvements in CRS and coassociated asthma. METHODS: Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) scores along with measures of CRS and asthma severity were recorded according to CRSwNP and CRSsNP status in n = 95 patients with severe CRS and asthma. Of this group, a further n = 23 had omalizumab for associated allergic asthma. Follow-up measures were collected 16 weeks after omalizumab treatment. RESULTS: HADS anxiety and depression prevalence in CRS were 49.47 % and 38.95%, respectively. Within the CRSwNP and CRSsNP group 53.06% and 45.66% had raised HADS-anxiety scores. Abnormal HADS-depression scores were present in 40.82% and 36.95% of the CRSwNP and CRSsNP groups, respectively. Correlations for sinonasal outcome test-22 (SNOT-22) versus HADS total was r = 0.59 p < 0.0001, HADS-anxiety r = 0.56 p < 0.0001 and HADS-depression r = 0.49 p < 0.0001. Omalizumab improved anxiety in CRS (p < 0.0001) regardless of nasal polyp status (CRSwNP p = 0.0042 and CRSsNP p = 0.0078). Depression scores did not improve in either group. SNOT-22 (p = 0.0006), asthma control questionnaire-7 (p = 0.0019) and mini-asthma quality of life questionnaire including emotional function (p = 0.0003 and p = 0.0009, respectively) all improved in both subgroups. CONCLUSION: In CRS and asthma, anxiety scores but not depression improved after omalizumab treatment. Anxiety may be closely related to airway disease severity, but depression may be independent of airway disease itself. If so, a separate mental health care pathway is needed for CRS patients with depression.

Novel assessment tool to detect breathing pattern disorder in patients with refractory asthma.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Breathing pattern disorder (BPD) can co-exist with and mimic asthma, acting to amplify symptoms and confound assessment of disease control, resulting in inappropriate treatment escalation. The aim of this research was to report the utility of a novel breathing pattern assessment tool (BPAT) to detect BPD in treatment-refractory asthma. METHODS: As a component of a multidisciplinary assessment, adult patients referred with treatment-refractory asthma underwent respiratory physiotherapy assessment to diagnose BPD. Based on this assessment, patients were classified as having asthma, asthma + BPD or BPD alone. BPAT data were collected in addition to questionnaire data (Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ) and Nijmegen Questionnaire (NQ)), pulmonary function and an assessment of exercise capacity. RESULTS: Data were retrospectively analysed for 150 (female; 69%) patients, mean (SD) age of 43 (14) years; characterized as asthma-only (n = 54, 36%), asthma + BPD (n = 63, 42%) and BPD-only (n = 33, 22%). Of the total population, 113 (76%) had an NQ score ≥23, but of these only 68% had physiotherapy evidence of BPD. Exercise capacity and AQLQ were lower in the asthma + BPD group than in the asthma-only group (P < 0.05), whilst lung function was similar between groups. Sensitivity analysis indicated that a BPAT score of ≥4 corresponded to a sensitivity of 0.92 and a specificity of 0.75 for diagnosis of BPD in this cohort. CONCLUSION: Breathing pattern irregularities are highly prevalent in individuals referred with treatment-refractory asthma and can be characterized using the BPAT. Further work is needed to determine inter-observer and within-subject variability and ensure the BPAT is a robust clinical tool. Watch the video abstract.