Protocol for the Wessex AsThma CoHort of difficult asthma (WATCH): a pragmatic real-life longitudinal study of difficult asthma in the clinic.

BACKGROUND: Asthma is now widely recognised to be a heterogeneous disease. The last two decades have seen the identification of a number of biological targets and development of various novel therapies. Despite this, asthma still represents a significant health and economic burden worldwide. Why some individuals should continue to suffer remains unclear. METHODS: The Wessex Asthma Cohort of Difficult Asthma (WATCH) is an ongoing 'real-life', prospective study of patients in the University Hospital Southampton Foundation Trust (UHSFT) Difficult Asthma service. Research data capture is aligned with the extensive clinical characterisation required of a commissioned National Health Service (NHS) Specialist Centre for Severe Asthma. Data acquisition includes detailed clinical, health and disease-related questionnaires, anthropometry, allergy and lung function testing, radiological imaging (in a small subset) and collection of biological samples (blood, urine and sputum). Prospective data are captured in parallel to clinical follow up appointments, with data entered into a bespoke database. DISCUSSION: The pragmatic ongoing nature of the WATCH study allows comprehensive assessment of the real world clinical spectrum seen in a Specialist Asthma Centre and allows a longitudinal perspective of deeply phenotyped patients. It is anticipated that the WATCH cohort would act as a vehicle for potential collaborative asthma studies and will build upon our understanding of mechanisms underlying difficult asthma.

Associations of Breathing Pattern Disorder and Nijmegen Score With Clinical Outcomes in Difficult-to-Treat Asthma.

BACKGROUND: Breathing pattern disorder (BPD) reflects altered biomechanical patterns of breathing that drive breathing difficulty and commonly accompanies difficult-to-treat asthma. Diagnosis of BPD has no gold standard, but Nijmegen Questionnaire (NQ) >23 is commonly used. OBJECTIVES: We sought to advance clinical characterization of BPD and better understand the clinical utility of NQ in difficult asthma in patients from the Wessex AsThma CoHort of difficult asthma (WATCH) study. METHODS: Associations between demographic and clinical factors in difficult asthma and BPD, ascertained by clinical diagnosis (yes/no, n = 476), by NQ scores (≤23: normal [no suggestion of BPD] and >23: abnormal [suggested BPD], n = 372), as well as the continuous raw NQ scores were assessed in univariate models to identify significant risk factors associated with the 3 BPD outcomes. For the clinician-diagnosed and NQ-based BPD, associations of continuous factors were assessed using the independent samples t test or the Mann-Whitney U test as appropriate for the data distribution or by the Spearman correlation test. Dichotomous associations were evaluated using χ2 tests. Multivariable logistic (dichotomous outcomes) and linear regression models (continuous outcomes) were developed to identify predictive factors associated with clinician-diagnosed and NQ-based BPD, dichotomous and continuous. Patients with data on NQ scores were grouped into NQ quartiles (low, moderate, high, and very high). The patterns of association of the quartiles with 4 health-related questionnaire outcomes were assessed using linear regression analyses. RESULTS: Multivariable regression identified that clinically diagnosed BPD was associated with female sex (odds ratio [OR]: 1.85; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.07, 3.20), comorbidities (rhinitis [OR: 2.46; 95% CI: 1.45, 4.17], gastroesophageal reflux disease [GORD] [OR: 2.77; 95% CI: 1.58, 4.84], inducible laryngeal obstruction [OR: 4.37; 95% CI: 2.01, 9.50], and any psychological comorbidity [OR: 1.86; 95% CI: 1.13, 3.07]), and health care usage (exacerbations [OR: 1.07; 95% CI: 1.003, 1.14] and previous intensive care unit (ICU) admissions [OR: 2.03; 95% CI: 1.18, 3.47]). Abnormal NQ-based BPD diagnosis was associated with history of eczema (OR: 1.83; 95% CI: 1.07, 3.14), GORD (OR: 1.94; 95% CI: 1.15, 3.27), or any psychological comorbidity (OR: 4.29; 95% CI: 2.64, 6.95) at multivariable regression. Differences between clinical and NQ-based BPD traits were also found with 42% discordance in BPD state between these definitions. Multivariable linear regression analysis with NQ as a continuous outcome showed positive association with worse asthma outcomes (admission to ICU, P = .037), different phenotypic traits (female sex, P = .001; ever smoker, P = .025), and greater multimorbidity (GORD, P = .002; sleep apnea, P = .04; and any psychological comorbidity, P < .0001). CONCLUSION: BPD is associated with worse health outcomes and negative health impacts in difficult asthma within a multimorbidity disease model. It therefore merits better recognition and prompt treatment. Clinical diagnosis and NQ offer different perspectives on BPD, so this goal may be best addressed by considering clinical features alongside the magnitude of NQ.

Frail2Fit study protocol: a feasibility and acceptability study of a virtual multimodal intervention delivered by volunteers to improve functional outcomes in older adults with frailty after discharge from hospital.

INTRODUCTION: Physical activity (PA) and replete nutritional status are key to maintaining independence and improving frailty status among frail older adults. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, healthcare has increasingly turned to virtual modes of delivery and there is interest in the use of trained volunteers to deliver PA and nutrition interventions. We aim to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of training hospital volunteers to deliver an online intervention, comprising exercise, behaviour change and nutrition support, to older people with frailty after discharge from hospital. METHODS: We will use a quasi-experimental mixed methods approach. Hospital volunteers (n=6) will be trained to deliver an online, 3-month, multimodal intervention to frail (Clinical Frailty Scale ≥5) adults ≥65 years (n=30) after discharge from hospital. Feasibility will be assessed by determining the number of volunteers recruited, trained and retained at the end of the study; the proportion of intervention sessions delivered; participant recruitment, retention and adherence to the intervention. To determine the acceptability of the intervention, interviews will be conducted among a purposive sample of older adults, and volunteers. Secondary outcomes will include physical function, appetite, well-being, quality of life, anxiety and depression, self-efficacy for managing chronic disease and PA. Outcomes will be measured at baseline, 3 months and 6 months. ANALYSIS: Descriptive statistics will be used to describe feasibility and adherence to the intervention. Secondary outcomes at baseline will be compared at 3 and 6 months. Interviews will be transcribed verbatim and analysed using thematic analysis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Health Research Authority ethical approval was obtained on 30 May 2022 (reference: 22/WA/0155). Results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journal articles, volunteer organisations, National Health Service communication systems and social media platforms. A toolkit will be developed to facilitate roll out of volunteer training. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05384730.

Multimorbidity in Difficult Asthma: The Need for Personalised and Non-Pharmacological Approaches to Address a Difficult Breathing Syndrome.

Three to ten percent of people living with asthma have difficult-to-treat asthma that remains poorly controlled despite maximum levels of guideline-based pharmacotherapy. This may result from a combination of multiple adverse health issues including aggravating comorbidities, inadequate treatment, suboptimal inhaler technique and/or poor adherence that may individually or collectively contribute to poor asthma control. Many of these are potentially "treatable traits" that can be pulmonary, extrapulmonary, behavioural or environmental factors. Whilst evidence-based guidelines lead clinicians in pharmacological treatment of pulmonary and many extrapulmonary traits, multiple comorbidities increase the burden of polypharmacy for the patient with asthma. Many of the treatable traits can be addressed with non-pharmacological approaches. In the current healthcare model, these are delivered by separate and often disjointed specialist services. This leaves the patients feeling lost in a fragmented healthcare system where clinical outcomes remain suboptimal even with the best current practice applied in each discipline. Our review aims to address this challenge calling for a paradigm change to conceptualise difficult-to-treat asthma as a multimorbid condition of a "Difficult Breathing Syndrome" that consequently needs a holistic personalised care attitude by combining pharmacotherapy with the non-pharmacological approaches. Therefore, we propose a roadmap for an evidence-based multi-disciplinary stepped care model to deliver this.

The Detrimental Clinical Associations of Anxiety and Depression with Difficult Asthma Outcomes.

Difficult asthma describes asthma in which comorbidities, inadequate treatment, suboptimal inhaler technique and/or poor adherence impede good asthma control. The association of anxiety and depression with difficult asthma outcomes (exacerbations, hospital admissions, asthma control, etc.) is unclear. This study assessed the clinical associations of anxiety and depression with difficult asthma outcomes in patients with a specialist diagnosis of difficult asthma. Using real-world data, we retrospectively phenotyped patients from the Wessex Asthma Cohort of Difficult Asthma (N = 441) using clinical diagnoses of anxiety and depression against those without anxiety or depression (controls). Additionally, we stratified patients by severity of psychological distress using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). We found that depression and/or anxiety were reported in 43.1% of subjects and were associated with worse disease-related questionnaire scores. Each psychological comorbidity group showed differential associations with difficult asthma outcomes. Anxiety alone (7.9%) was associated with dysfunctional breathing and more hospitalisations [anxiety, median (IQR): 0 (2) vs. controls: 0 (0)], while depression alone (11.6%) was associated with obesity and obstructive sleep apnoea. The dual anxiety and depression group (23.6%) displayed multimorbidity, worse asthma outcomes, female predominance and earlier asthma onset. Worse HADS-A scores in patients with anxiety were associated with worse subjective outcomes (questionnaire scores), while worse HADS-D scores in patients with depression were associated with worse objective (ICU admissions and maintenance oral corticosteroid requirements) and subjective outcomes. In conclusion, anxiety and depression are common in difficult asthma but exert differential detrimental effects. Difficult asthma patients with dual anxiety and depression experience worse asthma outcomes alongside worse measures of psychological distress. There is a severity-gradient association of HADS scores with worse difficult asthma outcomes. Collectively, our findings highlight the need for holistic, multidisciplinary approaches that promote early identification and management of anxiety and depression in difficult asthma patients.

The Role of Behavioral Science in Personalized Multimodal Prehabilitation in Cancer.

Multimodal prehabilitation is increasingly recognized as an important component of the pre-operative pathway in oncology. It aims to optimize physical and psychological health through delivery of a series of tailored interventions including exercise, nutrition, and psychological support. At the core of this prescription is a need for considerable health behavior change, to ensure that patients are engaged with and adhere to these interventions and experience the associated benefits. To date the prehabilitation literature has focused on testing the efficacy of devised exercise and nutritional interventions with a primary focus on physiological and mechanistic outcomes with little consideration for the role of behavioral science, supporting individual behavior change or optimizing patient engagement. Changing health behavior is complex and to maximize success, prehabilitation programs should draw on latest insights from the field of behavioral science. Behavioral science offers extensive knowledge on theories and models of health behavior change to further advance intervention effectiveness. Similarly, interventions developed with a person-centered approach, taking into consideration individual needs and preferences will increase engagement. In this article, we will provide an overview of the extent to which the existing prehabilitation literature incorporates behavioral science, as well as studies that have explored patient's attitudes toward prehabilitation. We will go on to describe and critique ongoing trials in a variety of contexts within oncology prehabilitation and discuss how current scientific knowledge may be enhanced from a behavioral science perspective. We will also consider the role of "surgery schools" and detail practical recommendations that can be embedded in existing or emerging clinical settings.

The effects of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and an in-hospital exercise training programme on physical fitness and quality of life in locally advanced rectal cancer patients: a randomised controlled trial (The EMPOWER Trial).

BACKGROUND: The EMPOWER trial aimed to assess the effects of a 9-week exercise prehabilitation programme on physical fitness compared with a usual care control group. Secondary aims were to investigate the effect of (1) the exercise prehabilitation programme on psychological health; and (2) neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCRT) on physical fitness and psychological health. METHODS: Between October 2013 and December 2016, adults with locally advanced rectal cancer undergoing standardised NCRT and surgery were recruited to a multi-centre trial. Patients underwent cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) and completed HRQoL questionnaires (EORTC-QLQ-C30 and EQ-5D-5L) pre-NCRT and post-NCRT (week 0/baseline). At week 0, patients were randomised to exercise prehabilitation or usual care (no intervention). CPET and HRQoL questionnaires were assessed at week 0, 3, 6 and 9, whilst semi-structured interviews were assessed at week 0 and week 9. Changes in oxygen uptake at anaerobic threshold (VO2 at AT (ml kg-1 min-1)) between groups were compared using linear mixed modelling. RESULTS: Thirty-eight patients were recruited, mean age 64 (10.4) years. Of the 38 patients, 33 were randomised: 16 to usual care and 17 to exercise prehabilitation (26 males and 7 females). Exercise prehabilitation significantly improved VO2 at AT at week 9 compared to the usual care. The change from baseline to week 9, when adjusted for baseline, between the randomised groups was + 2.9 ml kg -1 min -1; (95% CI 0.8 to 5.1), p = 0.011. CONCLUSION: A 9-week exercise prehabilitation programme significantly improved fitness following NCRT. These findings have informed the WesFit trial (NCT03509428) which is investigating the effects of community-based multimodal prehabilitation before cancer surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01914068 . Registered 1 August 2013.

SafeFit Trial: virtual clinics to deliver a multimodal intervention to improve psychological and physical well-being in people with cancer. Protocol of a COVID-19 targeted non-randomised phase III trial.

INTRODUCTION: The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic (caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus) on individuals with cancer has been profound. It has led to increased anxiety, distress and deconditioning due to reduced physical activity. We aim to investigate whether SafeFit, a multimodal intervention of physical activity, nutrition and psychological support delivered virtually by cancer exercise specialists (CES), can improve physical and emotional functionings during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A phase III non-randomised intervention trial, target recruitment of 1050 adults with suspected or confirmed diagnosis of cancer. All recruited participants will receive the multimodal intervention delivered by CES for 6 months. Sessions will be delivered 1-to-1 using telephone/video conferencing consultations. CES will work with each participant to devise a personalised programme of (1) physical activity, (2) basic dietary advice and (3) psychological support, all underpinned by behaviour change support. PRIMARY OUTCOME: Physical and emotional functioning as measured by the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer-Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC-QLQ-C30). SECONDARY OUTCOMES: overall quality of life measured by EORTC-QLQ-C30 and EQ-5D-5L, health economics, patient activation, self-efficacy to self-manage chronic disease, distress, impact of COVID-19 on emotional functioning, self-reported physical activity, functional capacity and nutrition. Adherence to the intervention will also be measured and a process evaluation conducted. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was obtained from the Health Research Authority (reference number 20/NW/0254). Results of this trial will be disseminated through publication of peer-reviewed articles, presentations at scientific conferences, and to the public and people with cancer in collaboration with our patient and public involvement representatives and partners. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04425616.

The Wessex Fit-4-Cancer Surgery Trial (WesFit): a protocol for a factorial-design, pragmatic randomised-controlled trial investigating the effects of a multi-modal prehabilitation programme in patients undergoing elective major intra-cavity cancer surgery.

Background: Surgical resection remains the primary curative treatment for intra-cavity cancer. Low physical fitness and psychological factors such as depression are predictive of post-operative morbidity, mortality and length of hospital stay. Prolonged post-operative morbidity is associated with persistently elevated risk of premature death. We aim to investigate whether a structured, responsive exercise training programme, a psychological support programme or combined exercise and psychological support, delivered between treatment decision and major intra-cavity surgery for cancer, can reduce length of hospital stay, compared with standard care. Methods: WesFit is a pragmatic , 2x2 factorial-design, multi-centre, randomised-controlled trial, with planned recruitment of N=1560. Participants will be randomised to one of four groups. Group 1 (control) will receive usual pre-operative care, Group 2 (exercise) patients will undergo 2/3 aerobic, high-intensity interval training sessions per week supervised by personal trainers. Group 3 (psychological support) patients are offered 1 session per week at a local cancer support centre. Group 4 will receive both exercise and psychological support. All patients undergo baseline and pre-operative cardiopulmonary exercise testing, complete self-report questionnaires and will be followed up at 30 days, 12 weeks and 12 months post-operatively. Primary outcome is post-operative length-of-stay. Secondary outcomes include disability-adjusted survival at 1-year postoperatively, post-operative morbidity, and health-related quality of life. Exploratory investigations include objectively measured changes in physical fitness assessed by cardiopulmonary exercise test, disease-free and overall mortality at 1-year postoperatively, longer-term physical activity behaviour change, pre-operative radiological tumour regression, pathological tumour regression, pre and post-operative body composition analysis, health economics analysis and nutritional characterisation and its relationship to post-operative outcome. Conclusions: The WesFit trial will be the first randomised controlled study investigating whether an exercise training programme +/- psychological intervention results in improvements in clinical and patient reported outcomes in patients undergoing major inter-cavity resection of cancer. ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT03509428 (26/04/2018).

Engaging adolescents in changing behaviour (EACH-B): a study protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial to improve dietary quality and physical activity.

BACKGROUND: Poor diet and lack of physical activity are strongly linked to non-communicable disease risk, but modifying them is challenging. There is increasing recognition that adolescence is an important time to intervene; habits formed during this period tend to last, and physical and psychological changes during adolescence make it an important time to help individuals form healthier habits. Improving adolescents' health behaviours is important not only for their own health now and in adulthood, but also for the health of any future children. Building on LifeLab-an existing, purpose-built educational facility at the University of Southampton-we have developed a multi-component intervention for secondary school students called Engaging Adolescents in Changing Behaviour (EACH-B) that aims to motivate and support adolescents to eat better and be more physically active. METHODS: A cluster randomised controlled trial is being conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of the EACH-B intervention. The primary outcomes of the intervention are self-reported dietary quality and objectively measured physical activity (PA) levels, both assessed at baseline and at 12-month follow-up. The EACH-B intervention consists of three linked elements: professional development for teachers including training in communication skills to support health behaviour change; the LifeLab educational module comprising in-school teaching of nine science lessons linked to the English National Curriculum and a practical day visit to the LifeLab facility; and a personalised digital intervention that involves social support and game features that promote eating better and being more active. Both the taught module and the LifeLab day are designed with a focus on the science behind the messages about positive health behaviours, such as diet and PA, for the adolescents now, in adulthood and their future offspring, with the aim of promoting personal plans for change. The EACH-B research trial aims to recruit approximately 2300 secondary school students aged 12-13 years from 50 schools (the clusters) from Hampshire and neighbouring counties. Participating schools will be randomised to either the control or intervention arm. The intervention will be run during two academic years, with continual recruitment of schools throughout the school year until the sample size is reached. The schools allocated to the control arm will receive normal schooling but will be offered the intervention after data collection for the trial is complete. An economic model will be developed to assess the cost-effectiveness of the EACH-B intervention compared with usual schooling. DISCUSSION: Adolescents' health needs are often ignored and they can be difficult to engage in behaviour change. Building a cheap, sustainable way of engaging them in making healthier choices will benefit their long-term health and that of their future children. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN 74109264 . Registered on 30 August 2019. EACH-B is a cluster randomised controlled trial, funded by the National Institute for Health Research (RP-PG-0216-20004).