Unsupervised home spirometry is not equivalent to supervised clinic spirometry in children and young people with cystic fibrosis: Results from the CLIMB-CF study.

BACKGROUND: Handheld spirometry allows monitoring of lung function at home, of particular importance during the COVID-19 pandemic. Pediatric studies are unclear on whether values are interchangeable with traditional, clinic-based spirometry. We aimed to assess differences between contemporaneous, home (unsupervised) and clinic (supervised) spirometry and the variability of the former. The accuracy of the commercially available spirometer used in the study was also tested. METHODS: Data from participants in the Clinical Monitoring and Biomarkers to stratify severity and predict outcomes in children with cystic fibrosisc (CLIMB-CF) Study aged ≥ 6 years who had paired (±1 day) clinic and home forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1 ) readings were analyzed. Variability during clinical stability over 6-months was assessed. Four devices from Vitalograph were tested using 1 and 3 L calibration syringes. RESULTS: Sixty-seven participants (median [interquartile range] age 10.7 [7.6-13.9] years) provided home and clinic FEV1 data pairs. The mean (SD) FEV1 % bias was 6.5% [±8.2%]) with wide limits of agreement (-9.6% to +22.7%); 76.2% of participants recorded lower results at home. Coefficient of variation of home FEV1 % during stable periods was 9.9%. Data from the testing of the handheld device used in CLIMB-CF showed a potential underread. CONCLUSION: In children and adolescents, home spirometry using hand-held equipment cannot be used interchangeably with clinic spirometry. Home spirometry is moderately variable during clinical stability. New handheld devices underread, particularly at lower volumes of potential clinical significance for smaller patients; this suggests that supervision does not account fully for the discrepancy. Opportunities should be taken to obtain dual device measurements in clinic, so that trend data from home can be utilized more accurately.

Bronchodilator response by interrupter technique to guide management of preschool wheeze.

OBJECTIVE: We examined relationships between clinical features and pulmonary function before and after inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) treatment in wheezy preschool children, and specifically, whether measuring bronchodilator response (BDR) could predict benefit from ICS. DESIGN: Clinical non-randomised intervention study SETTING: Secondary care. PATIENTS: Preschool children (2 years to <6 years) with recurrent wheeze. INTERVENTIONS: Inhaled beta-agonist, ICS. OUTCOME MEASURES: We measured prebronchodilator and postbronchodilator interrupter resistance (Rint) and symptom scores at 0 (V1), 4 (V2) and 12 (V3) weeks. At V2, those with a predetermined symptom level commenced ICS. Modified Asthma Predictive Index (mAPI) and parental perception of response to bronchodilator were recorded. Response to ICS was defined as a reduction in daily symptom score of >0.26. Positive BDR was defined as fall in Rint of ≥0.26 kPa.s/L, ≥35% predicted or ≥1.25 Z Scores. RESULTS: Out of 138 recruited children, 67 completed the full study. Mean (SD) prebronchodilator Rint at V2 was 1.22 (0.35) kPa.s/L, and fell after starting ICS (V3) to 1.09 (0.33) kPa.s/L (p<0.001), while mean (SD) daily symptom score fell from 0.56 (0.36) to 0.28 (0.36) after ICS (p<0.001). Positive Rint BDR before ICS (at V1 and/or V2), using all three threshold criteria, was significantly associated with response to ICS on symptom scores at V3 (p<0.05). mAPI was not significantly associated with response to ICS, and parents' perception of response to bronchodilator was not related to measured Rint BDR . CONCLUSIONS: Rint BDR may be helpful in selecting which wheezy preschool children are likely to benefit from ICS.

Pulse oximetry respiratory monitoring for assessment of acute childhood wheeze.

OBJECTIVE: There is a lack of objective measures to assess children with acute wheezing episodes. Increased respiratory rate (RR) and pulsus paradoxus (PP) are recognised markers, but poorly recorded in practice. We examined whether they can be reliably assessed from a pulse oximeter plethysmogram ('pleth') trace and predict clinical outcome. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We studied 44 children aged 1-7 years attending hospital with acute wheeze, following initial 'burst' bronchodilator therapy (BT), and used custom software to measure RR and assess PP from oximeter pleth traces. Traces were examined for quality, and the accuracy of the RR measurement was validated against simultaneous respiratory inductive plethysmography (RIP). RR and PP at 1 hour after BT were compared with clinical outcomes. RESULTS: RR from pleth and RIP showed excellent agreement, with a mean difference (RIP minus pleth) of -0.5 breaths per minute (limits of agreement -3.4 to +2.3). 52% of 1 min epochs contained 10 s or more of pleth artefact. At 1 hour after BT, children who subsequently required intravenous bronchodilators had significantly higher RR (median (IQR) 63 (62-66) vs 43 (37-51) breaths per minute) than those who did not, but their heart rate and oxygen saturation were similar. Children with RR ≥55 per minute spent longer in hospital: median (IQR) 30 (22-45) vs 10 (7-21) hours. All children who subsequently required hospital admission had PP-analogous pleth waveforms 1 hour after BT. CONCLUSION: RR can be reliably measured and PP detected from the pulse oximeter pleth trace in children with acute wheeze and both markers predict clinical outcome. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: UKCRN15742.