Interstitial lung disease: a review of classification, etiology, epidemiology, clinical diagnosis, pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatment.

Interstitial lung diseases (ILDs) refer to a heterogeneous and complex group of conditions characterized by inflammation, fibrosis, or both, in the interstitium of the lungs. This results in impaired gas exchange, leading to a worsening of respiratory symptoms and a decline in lung function. While the etiology of some ILDs is unclear, most cases can be traced back to factors such as genetic predispositions, environmental exposures (including allergens, toxins, and air pollution), underlying autoimmune diseases, or the use of certain medications. There has been an increase in research and evidence aimed at identifying etiology, understanding epidemiology, improving clinical diagnosis, and developing both pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments. This review provides a comprehensive overview of the current state of knowledge in the field of interstitial lung diseases.

Supporting self-management for patients with Interstitial Lung Diseases: Utility and acceptability of digital devices.

INTRODUCTION: Patients diagnosed with Interstitial Lung Diseases (ILD) use devices to self-monitor their health and well-being. Little is known about the range of devices, selection, frequency and terms of use and overall utility. We sought to quantify patients' usage and experiences with home digital devices, and further evaluate their perceived utility and barriers to adaptation. METHODS: A team of expert clinicians and patient partners interested in self-management approaches designed a 48-question cross-sectional electronic survey; specifically targeted at individuals diagnosed with ILD. The survey was critically appraised by the interdisciplinary self-management group at Royal Devon University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust during a 6-month validation process. The survey was open for participation between September 2021 and December 2022, and responses were collected anonymously. Data were analysed descriptively for quantitative aspects and through thematic analysis for qualitative input. RESULTS: 104 patients accessed the survey and 89/104 (86%) reported a diagnosis of lung fibrosis, including 46/89 (52%) idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) with 57/89 (64%) of participants diagnosed >3 years and 59/89 (66%) female. 52/65(80%) were in the UK; 33/65 (51%) reported severe breathlessness medical research council MRC grade 3-4 and 32/65 (49%) disclosed co-morbid arthritis or joint problems. Of these, 18/83 (22%) used a hand- held spirometer, with only 6/17 (35%) advised on how to interpret the readings. Pulse oximetry devices were the most frequently used device by 35/71 (49%) and 20/64 (31%) measured their saturations more than once daily. 29/63 (46%) of respondents reported home-monitoring brought reassurance; of these, for 25/63 (40%) a feeling of control. 10/57 (18%) felt it had a negative effect, citing fluctuating readings as causing stress and 'paranoia'. The most likely help-seeking triggers were worsening breathlessness 53/65 (82%) and low oxygen saturation 43/65 (66%). Nurse specialists were the most frequent source of help 24/63 (38%). Conclusion: Patients can learn appropriate technical skills, yet perceptions of home-monitoring are variable; targeted assessment and tailored support is likely to be beneficial.

Development and evaluation of a tool to optimise inhaler selection prior to hospital discharge following an exacerbation of COPD.

Introduction: Rates of mortality and re-admission after a hospitalised exacerbation of COPD are high and resistant to change. COPD guidelines do not give practical advice about the optimal selection of inhaled drugs and device in this situation. We hypothesised that a failure to optimise inhaled drug and drug delivery prior to discharge from hospital after an exacerbation would be associated with a modifiable increased risk of re-admission and death. We designed a study to 1) develop a practical inhaler selection tool to use at the point of hospital discharge and 2) implement this tool to understand the potential impact on modifying inhaler prescriptions, clinical outcomes, acceptability to clinicians and patients, and the feasibility of delivering a definitive trial to demonstrate potential benefit. Methods: We iteratively developed an inhaler selection tool for use prior to discharge following a hospitalised exacerbation of COPD using surveys with multiprofessional clinicians and a focus group of people living with COPD. We surveyed clinicians to understand their views on the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) for death and re-admission following a hospitalised exacerbation of COPD. We conducted a mixed-methods implementation feasibility study using the tool at discharge, and collated 30- and 90-day follow-up data including death and re-admissions. Additionally, we observed the tool being used and interviewed clinicians and patients about use of the tool in this setting. Results: We completed the design of an inhaler selection tool through two rounds of consultations with 94 multiprofessional clinicians, and a focus group of four expert patients. Regarding MCIDs, there was majority consensus for the following reductions from baseline being the MCID: 30-day readmissions 5-10%, 90-day readmissions 10-20%, 30-day mortality 5-10% and 90-day mortality 5-10%. 118 patients were assessed for eligibility and 26 had the tool applied. A change in inhaled medication was recommended in nine (35%) out of 26. Re-admission or death at 30 days was seen in 33% of the switch group and 35% of the no-switch group. Re-admission or death at 90 days was seen in 56% of the switch group and 41% of the no-switch group. Satisfaction with inhalers was generally high, and switching was associated with a small increase in the Feeling of Satisfaction with Inhaler questionnaire of 3 out of 50 points. Delivery of a definitive study would be challenging. Conclusion: We completed a mixed-methods study to design and implement a tool to aid optimisation of inhaled pharmacotherapy prior to discharge following a hospitalised exacerbation of COPD. This was not associated with fewer re-admissions, but was well received and one-third of people were eligible for a change in inhalers.

Wearable technology interventions in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is the third leading cause of death and is associated with multiple medical and psychological comorbidities. Therefore, future strategies to improve COPD management and outcomes are needed for the betterment of patient care. Wearable technology interventions offer considerable promise in improving outcomes, but prior reviews fall short of assessing their role in the COPD population. In this systematic review and meta-analysis we searched ovid-MEDLINE, ovid-EMBASE, CINAHL, CENTRAL, and IEEE databases from inception to April 2023 to identify studies investigating wearable technology interventions in an adult COPD population with prespecified outcomes of interest including physical activity promotion, increasing exercise capacity, exacerbation detection, and quality-of-life. We identified 7396 studies, of which 37 were included in our review. Meta-analysis showed wearable technology interventions significantly increased: the mean daily step count (mean difference (MD) 850 (494-1205) steps/day) and the six-minute walk distance (MD 5.81 m (1.02-10.61 m). However, the impact was short-lived. Furthermore, wearable technology coupled with another facet (such as health coaching or pulmonary rehabilitation) had a greater impact that wearable technology alone. Wearable technology had little impact on quality-of-life measures and had mixed results for exacerbation avoidance and prediction. It is clear that wearable technology interventions may have the potential to form a core part of future COPD management plans, but further work is required to translate this into meaningful clinical benefit.

Clinicians' Perspectives of Wearable Technology to Detect and Monitor Exacerbations of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: Mixed-Method Survey.

Objective: To investigate clinicians' perspectives on the current use of wearable technology for detecting COPD exacerbations, and to identify potential facilitators and barriers to its adoption in clinical settings. Methods: A mixed-method survey was conducted through an online survey platform involving clinicians working with COPD patients. The questionnaires were developed by an expert panel specialising in respiratory medicine at UCL. The questionnaire evaluated clinicians' perspectives on several aspects: the current extent of wearable technology utilisation, the perceived feasibility, and utility of these devices, as well as the potential facilitators and barriers that hinder its wider implementation. Results: Data from 118 clinicians were included in the analysis. Approximately 80% of clinicians did not currently use information from wearable devices in routine clinical care. A majority of clinicians did not have confidence in the effectiveness of wearables and their consequent impact on health outcomes. However, clinicians highlighted the potential value of wearables in helping deliver personalised care and more rapid assistance. Ease of use, technical support and accessibility of data were considered facilitating factors for wearable utilisation. Costs and lack of technical knowledge were the most frequently reported barriers to wearable utilisation. Conclusion: Clinicians' perspectives of the use of wearable technology to detect and monitor COPD exacerbations are variable. While accessibility and technical support facilitate wearable implementation, cost, technical issues, and knowledge act as barriers. Our findings highlight the facilitators and barriers to using wearables in patients with COPD and emphasise the need to assess patients' perspectives on wearable acceptability.

Evaluating a Remote Monitoring Program for Respiratory Diseases: Prospective Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with chronic respiratory diseases and those in the postdischarge period following hospitalization because of COVID-19 are particularly vulnerable, and little is known about the changes in their symptoms and physiological parameters. Continuous remote monitoring of physiological parameters and symptom changes offers the potential for timely intervention, improved patient outcomes, and reduced health care costs. OBJECTIVE: This study investigated whether a real-time multimodal program using commercially available wearable technology, home-based Bluetooth-enabled spirometers, finger pulse oximeters, and smartphone apps is feasible and acceptable for patients with chronic respiratory diseases, as well as the value of low-burden, long-term passive data collection. METHODS: In a 3-arm prospective observational cohort feasibility study, we recruited 60 patients from the Royal Free Hospital and University College Hospital. These patients had been diagnosed with interstitial lung disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, or post-COVID-19 condition (n=20 per group) and were followed for 180 days. This study used a comprehensive remote monitoring system designed to provide real-time and relevant data for both patients and clinicians. Data were collected using REDCap (Research Electronic Data Capture; Vanderbilt University) periodic surveys, Remote Assessment of Disease and Relapses-base active app questionnaires, wearables, finger pulse oximeters, smartphone apps, and Bluetooth home-based spirometry. The feasibility of remote monitoring was measured through adherence to the protocol, engagement during the follow-up period, retention rate, acceptability, and data integrity. RESULTS: Lowest-burden passive data collection methods, via wearables, demonstrated superior adherence, engagement, and retention compared with active data collection methods, with an average wearable use of 18.66 (SD 4.69) hours daily (77.8% of the day), 123.91 (SD 33.73) hours weekly (72.6% of the week), and 463.82 (SD 156.70) hours monthly (64.4% of the month). Highest-burden spirometry tasks and high-burden active app tasks had the lowest adherence, engagement, and retention, followed by low-burden questionnaires. Spirometry and active questionnaires had the lowest retention at 0.5 survival probability, indicating that they were the most burdensome. Adherence to and quality of home spirometry were analyzed; of the 7200 sessions requested, 4248 (59%) were performed. Of these, 90.3% (3836/4248) were of acceptable quality according to American Thoracic Society grading. Inclusion of protocol holidays improved retention measures. The technologies used were generally well received. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings provide evidence supporting the feasibility and acceptability of remote monitoring for capturing both subjective and objective data from various sources for respiratory diseases. The high engagement level observed with passively collected data suggests the potential of wearables for long-term, user-friendly remote monitoring in respiratory disease management. The unique piloting of certain features such as protocol holidays, alert notifications for missing data, and flexible support from the study team provides a reference for future studies in this field. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.2196/28873.

Current Knowledge, Satisfaction, and Use of E-Health Mobile Application (Seha) Among the General Population of Saudi Arabia: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Background: General population knowledge, satisfaction, and barriers to using Seha app have not been evaluated from a large-scale perspective. Therefore, this study aimed to explore current knowledge, satisfaction, and barriers of using Seha app and identify the most common mobile health application used among the general population in Saudi Arabia. Methods: A cross-sectional online survey, consisting of 25 questions, was distributed among the general population of Saudi Arabia. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the respondents' characteristics. Categorical variables were reported as frequencies and percentages. A chi-square (χ2) test was conducted to assess the statistical difference between respondents' demographic characteristics and their knowledge and use of the app. Results: Overall, 5008 respondents, both Saudi (3723: 74%) and non-Saudi (1285: 26%) as well as male 2142 (43%) and female 2866 (57%), across the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia completed the online survey. A total of 2921 (58%) had heard of the Seha app, although only 1286 (25%) had used the app. Higher percentages of users were from the western region, females and those within the age group of ≥51 years old, 388 users (29%: P<0.001), 804 (28%; P<0.001) and 67 (35%; P=0.013), respectively. Consulting a doctor was the most frequently utilized service, 576 users (58%). Respondents strongly agreed 402 (41%) that Seha was easy to use, and 538 (54%) strongly agreed that they would recommend Seha to others. The most common barrier of using Seha was a lack of knowledge about the app and its benefits, at 1556 (35%). Overall, the Tawakkalna app was the most utilized mobile health application provided by MOH used 2170 (48%). Conclusion: Utilization of the Seha app is quite low due to a lack of knowledge about the app and its benefits. Thus, the MOH should promote public awareness about the app and its benefits.

Home monitoring of physiology and symptoms to detect interstitial lung disease exacerbations and progression: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Acute exacerbations (AEs) and disease progression in interstitial lung disease (ILD) pose important challenges to clinicians and patients. AEs of ILD are variable in presentation but may result in rapid progression of ILD, respiratory failure and death. However, in many cases AEs of ILD may go unrecognised so that their true impact and response to therapy is unknown. The potential for home monitoring to facilitate early, and accurate, identification of AE and/or ILD progression has gained interest. With increasing evidence available, there is a need for a systematic review on home monitoring of patients with ILD to summarise the existing data. The aim of this review was to systematically evaluate the evidence for use of home monitoring for early detection of exacerbations and/or progression of ILD. METHOD: We searched Ovid-EMBASE, MEDLINE and CINAHL using Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines (PROSPERO registration number CRD42020215166). RESULTS: 13 studies involving 968 patients have demonstrated that home monitoring is feasible and of potential benefit in patients with ILD. Nine studies reported that mean adherence to home monitoring was >75%, and where spirometry was performed there was a significant correlation (r=0.72-0.98, p<0.001) between home and hospital-based readings. Two studies suggested that home monitoring of forced vital capacity might facilitate detection of progression in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. CONCLUSION: Despite the fact that individual studies in this systematic review provide supportive evidence suggesting the feasibility and utility of home monitoring in ILD, further studies are necessary to quantify the potential of home monitoring to detect disease progression and/or AEs.