The experience of shared decision-making for people with asthma: A systematic review and metasynthesis of qualitative studies.

OBJECTIVES: To identify, describe and synthesise the views and experiences of adults living with asthma regarding shared decision-making (SDM) in the existing qualitative literature METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive search of 10 databases (list databases) from inception until September 2023. Screening was performed according to inclusion criteria. Tools from the Joanna Briggs lnstitute were utilised for the purposes of data extraction and synthesis in this study. The data extraction process in this study employed the Capability, Opportunity and Motivation Model of Behaviour (COM-B model) as a framework, and a pragmatic meta-aggregative approach was employed to synthesise the collected results. RESULTS: Nineteen studies were included in the metasynthesis. Three synthesised themes were identified: the capability of people living with asthma, the opportunities of people living with asthma in SDM, and the motivation of the people living with asthma in SDM. CONCLUSIONS: We have identified specific factors influencing people living with asthma engaging in SDM. The findings of this study can serve as a basis for the implementation of SDM in people living with asthma and provide insights for the development of their SDM training programs. The ConQual score for the synthesised findings was rated as low. To enhance confidence, future studies should address dependability and credibility factors. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: This review contemplates the implementation of SDM from the perspective of people living with asthma, with the aim of providing patient-centred services for them. The results of this review can benefit the implementation of SDM and facilitate information sharing. It offers guidance for SDM skills training among adults living with asthma, fosters a better doctor-patient relationship and facilitates consensus in treatment decisions, thereby enabling personalised and tailored medical care. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Three nursing graduate students participated in the data extraction and integration process, with two students having extensive clinical experience that provided valuable insights for the integration.

Seguimiento de niños con diagnóstico de asma grave antes y durante la pandemia por COVID-19 / Follow-up of children diagnosed with severe asthma before and during the COVID-19 pandemic

En la pandemia por COVID-19 se exploraron estrategias de atención para garantizar el seguimiento de niños con asma grave. Estudio prospectivo, observacional, comparativo. Se incluyeron pacientes del programa de asma grave de un hospital pediátrico de tercer nivel (n 74). Se evaluó el grado de control, exacerbaciones y hospitalizaciones durante un período presencial (PP), marzo 2019-2020, y uno virtual (PV), abril 2020-2021. En el PP, se incluyeron 74 pacientes vs. 68 (92 %) del PV. En el PP, el 68 % (46) de los pacientes presentaron exacerbaciones vs. el 46 % (31) de los pacientes en el PV (p 0,003). En el PP, se registraron 135 exacerbaciones totales vs. 79 en el PV (p 0,001); hubo una reducción del 41 %. En el PP, el 47 % (32) de los pacientes tuvieron exacerbaciones graves vs. el 32 % (22) de los pacientes en el PV (p 0,048). Hubo 91 exacerbaciones graves en el PP vs. 49 en el PV (p 0,029), reducción del 46 %. No hubo diferencias en las hospitalizaciones (PP 10, PV 6; p 0,9). La telemedicina fue efectiva para el seguimiento de pacientes con asma grave

During the COVID-19 pandemic, health care strategies were explored to ensure the follow-up of children with severe asthma. This was a prospective, observational, and comparative study. Patients in the severe asthma program of a tertiary care children's hospital were included (n: 74). The extent of control, exacerbations, and hospitalizations during an in-person period (IPP) (March 2019­2020) and an online period (OP) (April 2020­2021) was assessed. A total of 74 patients were enrolled in the IPP compared to 68 (92%) in the OP. During the IPP, 68% (46) of patients had exacerbations versus 46% (31) during the OP (p = 0.003). During the IPP, 135 total exacerbations were recorded compared to 79 during the OP (p = 0.001); this accounted for a 41% reduction. During the IPP, 47% (32) of patients had severe exacerbations versus 32% (22) during the OP (p = 0.048). A total of 91 severe exacerbations were recorded during the IPP compared to 49 during the OP (p = 0.029); the reduction was 46%. No differences were observed in terms of hospitalization (IPP: 10, OP: 6; p = 0,9). Telemedicine was effective for the follow-up of patients with severe asthma.

Effect and mechanism of acupuncture on airway smooth muscle relaxation during acute asthma attack in rats. / é’ˆåˆºæ¾å¼›å“®å–˜æ€¥æ€§å‘ä½œå¤§é¼ æ°”é“å¹³æ»‘è‚Œçš„ä½œç”¨æœºåˆ¶.

OBJECTIVES: To explore the effect and mechanism of acupuncture at "Feishu" (BL 13) and "Dingchuan" (EX-B 1), and "Kongzui" (LU 6) and "Yuji" (LU 10) for relaxing the airway smooth muscle in the rats during acute asthma attack and compare the effect among the two pairs of acupoints and the acupoints combination. METHODS: Forty SD male rats with SPF grade were randomly divided into a blank group, a model group, a pair-point A group (acupuncture at "Feishu" [BL 13] and "Dingchuan" [EX-B 1]), a pair-point B group (acupuncture at "Kongzui" [LU 6] and "Yuji" [LU 10]) and a point combination group (acupuncture at "Feishu" [BL 13] , "Dingchuan" [EX-B 1], "Kongzui" [LU 6] and "Yuji" [LU 10]), with 8 rats in each group. Except the rats in the blank group, the model of acute asthma attack was induced by ovalbumin (OVA) combined with aluminum hydroxide gel in the rest groups. Started on the 15th day of modeling, except in the blank group and the model group, acupuncture was delivered in the other groups, 30 min in each intervention, once daily, for 14 days. In each group, the latent period of asthma inducing was measured; the lung resistance (LR) and dynamic lung compliance (Cdyn) were determined using lung function detector; the levels of endothelin-1 (ET-1), tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α), cyclic adenosine monophosphate (cAMP) and cyclic guanosine monophosphate (cGMP) in serum and bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) were measured by ELISA; with Masson staining and electron microscopy adopted, the morphology and ultrastructure of airway smooth muscle of the rats were observed; the mRNA and protein expressions of ET-1 and beta-2 adrenergic receptor (ß2-AR) were detected by quantitative real-time fluorescence and Western blot, respectively. RESULTS: Compared with the blank group, the latent period of asthma inducing was shortened (P<0.05), RL increased and Cdyn decreased (P<0.05) with the different concentrations of methacholine (0.025 mg/kg, 0.05 mg/kg, 0.1 mg/kg, 0.2 mg/kg) in the model group. In the pair-point A group, the pair-point B group and the point combination group, the latent period of asthma inducing was prolonged (P<0.05), RL decreased and Cdyn increased (P<0.05) with different concentrations of methacholine when compared with those in the model group; and the latent period of asthma inducing in the point combination group was longer than that in the pair-point A group (P<0.05). Compared with the blank group, the levels of ET-1, TNF-α and cGMP in the serum and BALF were elevated (P<0.05), and those of cAMP reduced (P<0.05) in the model group. The levels of ET-1, TNF-α and cGMP in the serum and BALF were reduced (P<0.05), and those of cAMP elevated (P<0.05) in the pair-point A group, the pair-point B group and the point combination group when compared with those in the model group. In the blank group, the lung tissue was normal structurally. In the model group, the collagen fibers were proliferated increasingly, the smooth muscle was thickened, the mitochondria were swollen, and their cristae disrupted and reduced massively. In the pair-point B group, the collagen fibers were proliferated, the smooth muscle was thicker compared with that in the blank group, the mitochondria were mildly swollen and their cristae disrupted partially. In the pair-point A group and the point combination group, the lung tissue changes were obviously alleviated in comparison with the model group, the mitochondria were slightly swollen and their cristae disrupted occasionally. Compared with the blank group, the mRNA and protein expression of ET-1 increased and that of ß2-AR decreased in the lung tissue of the model group (P<0.05). In the pair-point A group, the pair-point B group and the point combination group, the mRNA and protein expression of ET-1 was reduced and that of ß2-AR elevated in the lung tissue when compared with those in the model group (P<0.05). In comparison with the pair-point A group, the mRNA expression of ß2-AR was elevated in the point combination group (P<0.05). When compared with the pair-point B group, the mRNA expression of ß2-AR increased, the protein expression of ET-1 decreased (P<0.05) in the point combination group. CONCLUSIONS: Acupuncture at "Feishu" (BL 13) and "Dingchuan" (EX-B 1), "Kongzui" (LU 6) and "Yuji" (LU 10), two pairs of acupoints relieves the airway smooth muscle spasm in the rats during acute asthma attack, which may be related to inhibiting the mRNA and protein expression of ET-1 to reduce the excretion of ET-1 and TNF-α; while enhancing the mRNA and protein expression of ß2-AR to balance the levels of cAMP and cGMP. The effect is optimal when acupuncture is delivered at two pairs of acupoints simultaneously.

LINC00158 modulates the function of BEAS-2B cells via targeting BCL11B and ameliorates OVA-LPS-induced severe asthma in mice models.

Persistent type (T) 2 airway inflammation plays an important role in the development of severe asthma. However, the molecular mechanisms leading to T2 severe asthma have yet to be fully clarified. Human normal lung epithelial cells (BEAS-2B cells) were transfected with LINC00158/BCL11B plasmid/small interfering RNA (siRNA). Levels of epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT)-related markers were measured using real-time qPCR (RT-qPCR) and western blot. A dual luciferase reporter assay was used to validate the targeting relationship between LINC00158 and BCL11B. The effects of LINC00158-lentivirus vector-mediated overexpression and dexamethasone on ovalbumin (OVA)/lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-induced severe asthma were investigated in mice in vivo. Our study showed that overexpression of LINC00158/BCL11B inhibited the levels of EMT-related proteins, apoptosis, and promoted the proliferation of BEAS-2B cells. BCL11B was a direct target of LINC00158. And LINC00158 targeted BCL11B to regulate EMT, apoptosis, and cell proliferation of BEAS-2B cells. Compared with severe asthma mice, LINC00158 overexpression alleviated OVA/LPS-induced airway hyperresponsiveness and airway inflammation, including reductions in T helper 2 cells factors in lung tissue and BALF, serum total- and OVA-specific IgE, inflammatory cell infiltration, and goblet cells hyperplasia. In addition, LINC00158 overexpression alleviated airway remodeling, including reduced plasma TGF-ß1 and collagen fiber deposition, as well as suppression of EMT. Additionally, overexpression of LINC00158 enhanced the therapeutic effect of dexamethasone in severe asthmatic mice models. LINC00158 regulates BEAS-2B cell biological function by targeting BCL11B. LINC00158 ameliorates T2 severe asthma in vivo and provides new insights into the clinical treatment of severe asthma.

[Standard technical specifications for methacholine chloride (Methacholine) bronchial challenge test (2023)].

The methacholine challenge test (MCT) is a standard evaluation method of assessing airway hyperresponsiveness (AHR) and its severity, and has significant clinical value in the diagnosis and treatment of bronchial asthma. A consensus working group consisting of experts from the Pulmonary Function and Clinical Respiratory Physiology Committee of the Chinese Association of Chest Physicians, the Task Force for Pulmonary Function of the Chinese Thoracic Society, and the Pulmonary Function Group of Respiratory Branch of the Chinese Geriatric Society jointly developed this consensus. Based on the "Guidelines for Pulmonary Function-Bronchial Provocation Test" published in 2014, the issues encountered in its use, and recent developments, the group has updated the Standard technical specifications of methacholine chloride (methacholine) bronchial challenge test (2023). Through an extensive collection of expert opinions, literature reviews, questionnaire surveys, and multiple rounds of online and offline discussions, the consensus addressed the eleven core issues in MCT's clinical practice, including indications, contraindications, preparation of provocative agents, test procedures and methods, quality control, safety management, interpretation of results, and reporting standards. The aim was to provide clinical pulmonary function practitioners in healthcare institutions with the tools to optimize the use of this technique to guide clinical diagnosis and treatment.Summary of recommendationsQuestion 1: Who is suitable for conducting MCT? What are contraindications for performing MCT?Patients with atypical symptoms and a clinical suspicion of asthma, patients diagnosed with asthma requiring assessment of the severity of airway hyperresponsiveness, individuals with allergic rhinitis who are at risk of developing asthma, patients in need of evaluating the effectiveness of asthma treatment, individuals in occupations with high safety risks due to airway hyperresponsiveness, patients with chronic diseases prone to airway hyperresponsiveness, others requiring assessment of airway reactivity.Absolute contraindications: (1) Patients who are allergic to methacholine (MCh) or other parasympathomimetic drugs, with allergic reactions including rash, itching/swelling (especially of the face, tongue, and throat), severe dizziness, and dyspnea; (2) Patients with a history of life-threatening asthma attacks or those who have required mechanical ventilation for asthma attacks in the past three months; (3) Patients with moderate to severe impairment of baseline pulmonary function [Forced Expiratory Volume in one second (FEV1) less than 60% of the predicted value or FEV1<1.0 L]; (4) Severe urticaria; (5) Other situations inappropriate for forced vital capacity (FVC) measurement, such as myocardial infarction or stroke in the past three months, poorly controlled hypertension, aortic aneurysm, recent eye surgery, or increased intracranial pressure.Relative contraindications: (1) Moderate or more severe impairment of baseline lung function (FEV1%pred<70%), but individuals with FEV1%pred>60% may still be considered for MCT with strict observation and adequate preparation; (2) Experiencing asthma acute exacerbation; (3) Poor cooperation with baseline lung function tests that do not meet quality control requirements; (4) Recent respiratory tract infection (<4 weeks); (5) Pregnant or lactating women; (6) Patients currently using cholinesterase inhibitors (for the treatment of myasthenia gravis); (7) Patients who have previously experienced airway spasm during pulmonary function tests, with a significant decrease in FEV1 even without the inhalation of provocative.Question 2: How to prepare and store the challenge solution for MCT?Before use, the drug must be reconstituted and then diluted into various concentrations for provocation. The dilution concentration and steps for MCh vary depending on the inhalation method and provocation protocol used. It is important to follow specific steps. Typically, a specified amount of diluent is added to the methacholine reagent bottle for reconstitution, and the mixture is shaken until the solution becomes clear. The diluent is usually physiological saline, but saline with phenol (0.4%) can also be used. Phenol can reduce the possibility of bacterial contamination, and its presence does not interfere with the provocation test. After reconstitution, other concentrations of MCh solution are prepared using the same diluent, following the dilution steps, and then stored separately in sterile containers. Preparers should carefully verify and label the concentration and preparation time of the solution and complete a preparation record form. The reconstituted and diluted MCh solution is ready for immediate use without the need for freezing. It can be stored for two weeks if refrigerated (2-8 ℃). The reconstituted solution should not be stored directly in the nebulizer reservoir to prevent crystallization from blocking the capillary opening and affecting aerosol output. The temperature of the solution can affect the production of the nebulizer and cause airway spasms in the subject upon inhaling cold droplets. Thus, refrigerated solutions should be brought to room temperature before use.Question 3: What preparation is required for subjects prior to MCT?(1) Detailed medical history inquiry and exclusion of contraindications.(2) Inquiring about factors and medications that may affect airway reactivity and assessing compliance with medication washout requirements: When the goal is to evaluate the effectiveness of asthma treatment, bronchodilators other than those used for asthma treatment do not need to be discontinued. Antihistamines and cromolyn have no effect on MCT responses, and the effects of a single dose of inhaled corticosteroids and leukotriene modifiers are minimal, thus not requiring cessation before the test. For patients routinely using corticosteroids, whether to discontinue the medication depends on the objective of the test: if assisting in the diagnosis of asthma, differential diagnosis, aiding in step-down therapy for asthma, or exploring the effect of discontinuing anti-inflammatory treatment, corticosteroids should be stopped before the provocation test; if the patient is already diagnosed with asthma and the objective is to observe the level of airway reactivity under controlled medication conditions, then discontinuation is not necessary. Medications such as IgE monoclonal antibodies, IL-4Rα monoclonal antibodies, traditional Chinese medicine, and ethnic medicines may interfere with test results, and clinicians should decide whether to discontinue these based on the specific circumstances.(3) Explaining the test procedure and potential adverse reactions, and obtaining informed consent if necessary.Question 4: What are the methods of the MCT? And which ones are recommended in current clinical practice?Commonly used methods for MCT in clinical practice include the quantitative nebulization method (APS method), Forced Oscillalion method (Astograph method), 2-minute tidal breathing method (Cockcroft method), hand-held quantitative nebulization method (Yan method), and 5-breath method (Chai 5-breath method). The APS method allows for precise dosing of inhaled Methacholine, ensuring accurate and reliable results. The Astograph method, which uses respiratory resistance as an assessment indicator, is easy for subjects to perform and is the simplest operation. These two methods are currently the most commonly used clinical practice in China.Question 5: What are the steps involved in MCT?The MCT consists of the following four steps:(1) Baseline lung function test: After a 15-minute rest period, the subjects assumes a seated position and wear a nose clip for the measurement of pulmonary function indicators [such as FEV1 or respiratory resistance (Rrs)]. FEV1 should be measured at least three times according to spirometer quality control standards, ensuring that the best two measurements differ by less than 150 ml and recording the highest value as the baseline. Usually, if FEV1%pred is below 70%, proceeding with the challenge test is not suitable, and a bronchodilation test should be considered. However, if clinical assessment of airway reactivity is necessary and FEV1%pred is between 60% and 70%, the provocation test may still be conducted under close observation, ensuring the subject's safety. If FEV1%pred is below 60%, it is an absolute contraindication for MCT.(2) Inhalation of diluent and repeat lung function test for control values: the diluent, serving as a control for the inhaled MCh, usually does not significantly impact the subject's lung function. the higher one between baseline value and the post-dilution FEV1 is used as the reference for calculating the rate of FEV1 decline. If post-inhalation FEV1 decreases, there are usually three scenarios: ①If FEV1 decreases by less than 10% compared to the baseline, the test can proceed, continue the test and administer the first dose of MCh. ②If the FEV1 decreases by≥10% and<20%, indicating a heightened airway reactivity to the diluent, proceed with the lowest concentration (dose) of the provoking if FEV1%pred has not yet reached the contraindication criteria for the MCT. if FEV1%pred<60% and the risk of continuing the challenge test is considerable, it is advisable to switch to a bronchodilation test and indicate the change in the test results report. ③If FEV1 decreases by≥20%, it can be directly classified as a positive challenge test, and the test should be discontinued, with bronchodilators administered to alleviate airway obstruction.(3) Inhalation of MCh and repeat lung function test to assess decline: prepare a series of MCh concentrations, starting from the lowest and gradually increasing the inhaled concentration (dose) using different methods. Perform pulmonaryfunction tests at 30 seconds and 90 seconds after completing nebulization, with the number of measurements limited to 3-4 times. A complete Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) measurement is unnecessary during testing; only an acceptable FEV1 measurement is required. The interval between two consecutive concentrations (doses) generally should not exceed 3 minutes. If FEV1 declines by≥10% compared to the control value, reduce the increment of methacholine concentration (dose) and adjust the inhalation protocol accordingly. If FEV1 declines by≥20% or more compared to the control value or if the maximum concentration (amount) has been inhaled, the test should be stopped. After inhaling the MCh, close observation of the subject's response is necessary. If necessary, monitor blood oxygen saturation and auscultate lung breath sounds. The test should be promptly discontinued in case of noticeable clinical symptoms or signs.(4) Inhalation of bronchodilator and repeat lung function test to assess recovery: when the bronchial challenge test shows a positive response (FEV1 decline≥20%) or suspiciously positive, the subject should receive inhaled rapid-acting bronchodilators, such as short-acting beta-agonists (SABA) or short-acting muscarinic antagonists (SAMA). Suppose the subject exhibits obvious symptoms of breathlessness, wheezing, or typical asthma manifestations, and wheezing is audible in the lungs, even if the positive criteria are not met. In that case, the challenge test should be immediately stopped, and rapid-acting bronchodilators should be administered. Taking salbutamol as an example, inhale 200-400 µg (100 µg per puff, 2-4 puffs, as determined by the physician based on the subject's condition). Reassess pulmonary function after 5-10 minutes. If FEV1 recovers to within 10% of the baseline value, the test can be concluded. However, if there is no noticeable improvement (FEV1 decline still≥10%), record the symptoms and signs and repeat the bronchodilation procedure as mentioned earlier. Alternatively, add Ipratropium bromide (SAMA) or further administer nebulized bronchodilators and corticosteroids for intensified treatment while keeping the subject under observation until FEV1 recovers to within 90% of the baseline value before allowing the subject to leave.Question 6: What are the quality control requirements for the APS and Astograph MCT equipment?(1) APS Method Equipment Quality Control: The APS method for MCT uses a nebulizing inhalation device that requires standardized flowmeters, compressed air power source pressure and flow, and nebulizer aerosol output. Specific quality control methods are as follows:a. Flow and volume calibration of the quantitative nebulization device: Connect the flowmeter, an empty nebulization chamber, and a nebulization filter in sequence, attaching the compressed air source to the bottom of the chamber to ensure airtight connections. Then, attach a 3 L calibration syringe to the subject's breathing interface and simulate the flow during nebulization (typically low flow:<2 L/s) to calibrate the flow and volume. If calibration results exceed the acceptable range of the device's technical standards, investigate and address potential issues such as air leaks or increased resistance due to a damp filter, then recalibrate. Cleaning the flowmeter or replacing the filter can change the resistance in the breathing circuit, requiring re-calibration of the flow.b. Testing the compressed air power source: Regularly test the device, connecting the components as mentioned above. Then, block the opening of the nebulization device with a stopper or hand, start the compressed air power source, and test its pressure and flow. If the test results do not meet the technical standards, professional maintenance of the equipment may be required.c. Verification of aerosol output of the nebulization chamber: Regularly verify all nebulization chambers used in provocation tests. Steps include adding a certain amount of saline to the chamber, weighing and recording the chamber's weight (including saline), connecting the nebulizer to the quantitative nebulization device, setting the nebulization time, starting nebulization, then weighing and recording the post-nebulization weight. Calculate the unit time aerosol output using the formula [(weight before nebulization-weight after nebulization)/nebulization time]. Finally, set the nebulization plan for the provocation test based on the aerosol output, considering the MCh concentration, single inhalation nebulization duration, number of nebulization, and cumulative dose to ensure precise dosing of the inhaled MCh.(2) Astograph method equipment quality control: Astograph method equipment for MCT consists of a respiratory resistance monitoring device and a nebulization medication device. Perform zero-point calibration, volume calibration, impedance verification, and nebulization chamber checks daily before tests to ensure the resistance measurement system and nebulization system function properly. Calibration is needed every time the equipment is turned on, and more frequently if there are significant changes in environmental conditions.a. Zero-point calibration: Perform zero-point calibration before testing each subject. Ensure the nebulization chamber is properly installed and plugged with no air leaks.b. Volume calibration: Use a 3 L calibration syringe to calibrate the flow sensor at a low flow rate (approximately 1 L/s).c. Resistance verification: Connect low impedance tubes (1.9-2.2 cmH2O·L-1·s-1) and high impedance tubes (10.2-10.7 cmH2O·L-1·s-1) to the device interface for verification.d. Bypass check: Start the bypass check and record the bypass value; a value>150 ml/s is normal.e. Nebulization chamber check: Check each of the 12 nebulization chambers daily, especially those containing bronchodilators, to ensure normal spraying. The software can control each nebulization chamber to produce spray automatically for a preset duration (e.g., 2 seconds). Observe the formation of water droplets on the chamber walls, indicating normal spraying. If no nebulization occurs, check for incorrect connections or blockages.Question 7: How to set up and select the APS method in MCT?The software program of the aerosol provocation system in the quantitative nebulization method can independently set the nebulizer output, concentration of the methacholine agent, administration time, and number of administrations and combine these parameters to create the challenge test process. In principle, the concentration of the methacholine agent should increase from low to high, and the dose should increase from small to large. According to the standard, a 2-fold or 4-fold incremental challenge process is generally used. In clinical practice, the dose can be simplified for subjects with good baseline lung function and no history of wheezing, such as using a recommended 2-concentration, 5-step method (25 and 50 g/L) and (6.25 and 25 g/L). Suppose FEV1 decreases by more than 10% compared to the baseline during the test to ensure subject safety. In that case, the incremental dose of the methacholine agent can be reduced, and the inhalation program can be adjusted appropriately. If the subject's baseline lung function declines or has recent daytime or nighttime symptoms such as wheezing or chest tightness, a low concentration, low dose incremental process should be selected.Question 8: What are the precautions for the operation process of the Astograph method in MCT?(1) Test equipment: The Astograph method utilizes the forced oscillation technique, applying a sinusoidal oscillating pressure at the mouthpiece during calm breathing. Subjects inhale nebulized MCh of increasing concentrations while continuous monitoring of respiratory resistance (Rrs) plots the changes, assessing airway reactivity and sensitivity. The nebulization system employs jet nebulization technology, comprising a compressed air pump and 12 nebulization cups. The first cup contains saline, cups 2 to 11 contain increasing concentrations of MCh, and the 12th cup contains a bronchodilator solution.(2) Provocation process: Prepare 10 solutions of MCh provocant with gradually increasing concentrations.(3) Operational procedure: The oscillation frequency is usually set to 3 Hz (7 Hz for children) during the test. The subject breathes calmly, inhales saline solution nebulized first, and records the baseline resistance value (if the subject's baseline resistance value is higher than 10 cmH2O·L-1·s-1, the challenge test should not be performed). Then, the subject gradually inhales increasing concentrations of methacholine solution. Each concentration solution is inhaled for 1 minute, and the nebulization system automatically switches to the next concentration for inhalation according to the set time. Each nebulizer cup contains 2-3 ml of solution, the output is 0.15 ml/min, and each concentration is inhaled for 1 minute. The dose-response curve is recorded automatically. Subjects should breathe tidally during the test, avoiding deep breaths and swallowing. Continue until Rrs significantly rises to more than double the baseline value, or if the subject experiences notable respiratory symptoms or other discomfort, such as wheezing in both lungs upon auscultation. At this point, the inhalation of the provocant should be stopped and the subject switchs to inhaling a bronchodilator until Rrs returns to pre-provocation levels. If there is no significant increase in Rrs, stop the test after inhaling the highest concentration of MCh.Question 9: How to interpret the results of the MCT?The method chosen for the MCT determines the specific indicators used for interpretation. The most commonly used indicator is FEV1, although other parameters such as Peak Expiratory Flow (PEF) and Rrs can also be used to assess airway hyperresponsiveness.Qualitative judgment: The test results can be classified as positive, suspiciously positive, or negative, based on a combination of the judgment indicators and changes in the subject's symptoms. If FEV1 decreases by≥20% compared to the baseline value after not completely inhaling at the highest concentration, the result can be judged as positive for Methacholine bronchial challenge test. If the patient has obvious wheezing symptoms or wheezing is heard in both lungs, but the challenge test does not meet the positive criteria (the highest dose/concentration has been inhaled), and FEV1 decreases between 10% and 20% compared to the baseline level, the result can also be judged as positive. If FEV1 decreases between 15% and 20% compared to the baseline value without dyspnea or wheezing attacks, the result can be judged as suspiciously positive. Astograph method: If Rrs rises to 2 times or more of the baseline resistance before reaching the highest inhalation concentration, or if the subject's lungs have wheezing and severe coughing, the challenge test can be judged as positive. Regardless of the result of the Methacholine bronchial challenge test, factors that affect airway reactivity, such as drugs, seasons, climate, diurnal variations, and respiratory tract infections, should be excluded.Quantitative judgment: When using the APS method, the severity of airway hyperresponsiveness can be graded based on PD20-FEV1 or PC20-FEV1. Existing evidence suggests that PD20 shows good consistency when different nebulizers, inhalation times, and starting concentrations of MCh are used for bronchial provocation tests, whereas there is more variability with PC20. Therefore, PD20 is often recommended as the quantitative assessment indicator. The threshold value for PD20 with the APS method is 2.5 mg.The Astograph method often uses the minimum cumulative dose (Dmin value, in Units) to reflect airway sensitivity. Dmin is the minimum cumulative dose of MCh required to produce a linear increase in Rrs. A dose of 1 g/L of the drug concentration inhaled for 1-minute equals 1 unit. It's important to note that with the continuous increase in inhaled provocant concentration, the concept of cumulative dose in the Astograph method should not be directly compared to other methods. Most asthma patients have a Dmin<10 Units, according to Japanese guidelines. The Astograph method, having been used in China for over twenty years, suggests a high likelihood of asthma when Dmin≤6 Units, with a smaller Dmin value indicating a higher probability. When Dmin is between 6 and 10 Units, further differential diagnosis is advised to ascertain whether the condition is asthma.Precautions:A negative methacholine challenge test (MCT) does not entirely rule out asthma. The test may yield negative results due to the following reasons:(1) Prior use of medications that reduce airway responsiveness, such as ß2 agonists, anticholinergic drugs, antihistamines, leukotriene receptor antagonists, theophylline, corticosteroids, etc., and insufficient washout time.(2) Failure to meet quality control standards in terms of pressure, flow rate, particle size, and nebulization volume of the aerosol delivery device.(3) Poor subject cooperation leads to inadequate inhalation of the methacholine agent.(4) Some exercise-induced asthma patients may not be sensitive to direct bronchial challenge tests like the Methacholine challenge and require indirect bronchial challenge tests such as hyperventilation, cold air, or exercise challenge to induce a positive response.(5) A few cases of occupational asthma may only react to specific antigens or sensitizing agents, requiring specific allergen exposure to elicit a positive response.A positive MCT does not necessarily indicate asthma. Other conditions can also present with airway hyperresponsiveness and yield positive results in the challenge test, such as allergic rhinitis, chronic bronchitis, viral upper respiratory infections, allergic alveolitis, tropical eosinophilia, cystic fibrosis, sarcoidosis, bronchiectasis, acute respiratory distress syndrome, post-cardiopulmonary transplant, congestive heart failure, and more. Furthermore, factors like smoking, air pollution, or exercise before the test may also result in a positive bronchial challenge test.Question 10: What are the standardized requirements for the MCT report?The report should include: (1) basic information about the subject; (2) examination data and graphics: present baseline data, measurement data after the last two challenge doses or concentrations in tabular form, and the percentage of actual measured values compared to the baseline; flow-volume curve and volume-time curve before and after challenge test; dose-response curve: showing the threshold for positive challenge; (3) opinions and conclusions of the report: including the operator's opinions, quality rating of the examination, and review opinions of the reviewing physician.Question 11: What are the adverse reactions and safety measures of MCT?During the MCT, the subject needs to repeatedly breathe forcefully and inhale bronchial challenge agents, which may induce or exacerbate bronchospasm and contraction and may even cause life-threatening situations. Medical staff should be fully aware of the indications, contraindications, medication use procedures, and emergency response plans for the MCT.

RNA therapeutics for respiratory diseases.

It has become increasingly common to utilize RNA treatment to treat respiratory illnesses. Experimental research on both people and animals has advanced quickly since the turn of the twenty-first century in an effort to discover a treatment for respiratory ailments that could not be accomplished with earlier techniques, specifically in treating prevalent respiratory diseases such as lung cancer, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), respiratory infections caused by viruses, and asthma. This chapter has provided a comprehensive overview of the scientific evidence in applying RNA therapy to treat respiratory diseases. The chapter describes the development of this therapy for respiratory diseases. At the same time, the types of RNA therapy for respiratory diseases have been highlighted. In addition, the mechanism of this therapy for respiratory diseases has also been covered. These insights are indispensable if this therapy is to be developed widely.

Treatable Traits in Asthma: The Importance of Extrapulmonary Traits-GERD, CRSwNP, Atopic Dermatitis, and Depression/Anxiety.

Treatable traits is a personalized medicine approach to the management of airway disease. Assessing traits within the 3 domains of pulmonary, extrapulmonary, and behavioral/lifestyle/risk factor traits, and applying targeted treatments to effectively manage these traits, enables a holistic and personalized approach to care. Asthma is a heterogeneous and complex airway disease that is frequently complicated by several extrapulmonary traits that impact asthma outcomes and predict future outcomes. We propose that the identification of extrapulmonary and behavioral risk factor traits and the implementation of targeted therapy will lead to improved management of people with asthma. Furthermore, many extrapulmonary traits present as "connected comorbidities"; that is, they coexist with asthma, have an impact on asthma, and effective treatment improves both asthma and the comorbidity or the comorbidities may share a similar mechanism. In this review, we explore this concept and look at atopic dermatitis, chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps, gastroesophageal reflux disease, anxiety, and depression as treatable traits of asthma and how these can be managed using this approach.

Can an educational intervention in the context of inpatient pulmonary rehabilitation improve asthma self-management at work? A study protocol of a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Asthma self-management (e.g., trigger avoidance or correct medication use) is a cornerstone of therapy. Its successful implementation in everyday working life is determined by psychosocial working conditions, in particular by support from superiors and colleagues and the job decision latitude (i.e., when and how to carry out which tasks). To empower individuals with asthma to modify their working conditions, employees need to use certain communication skills and acquire specific knowledge. Both could be taught as part of patient education during pulmonary rehabilitation. Therefore, the aim of the planned study is the development and multicentre implementation of an education module for individuals with asthma during their rehabilitation and to generate evidence on its effectiveness. METHODS: Participants (n ≥ 180) will be recruited, randomized into an intervention and a control group, trained and surveyed in two rehabilitation clinics. The intervention group will receive the supplementary patient education module "Asthma and Work" while the control group will participate in a program on " Eating behaviour" (both 2 × 50 min). The effectiveness of the intervention will be examined based on pre-post measurements (T1 and T2) and a 3-month follow-up (T3). We will consider behavioural intention (T2) and asthma self-management at work (T3) as primary outcomes. Secondary outcomes will include self-management-related knowledge, self-efficacy, number of sick days, number of exacerbations, asthma control (Asthma Control Test), asthma-related quality of life (Marks Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire), and subjective employment prognosis (Brief Scale Measuring the Subjective Prognosis of Gainful Employment). The pre-post comparisons are to be evaluated using univariate analyses of covariance. DISCUSSION: Improving asthma self-management at work could increase the work ability and social participation of employees with asthma. This could reduce costs, e.g. in terms of asthma-related sick leave. TRIAL REGISTRATION: German Clinical Trials Register (ID: DRKS00031843).

Asthma control and associated risk factors among adults with current asthma: Findings from 2019 behavioral risk factor surveillance system asthma call-back survey.

BACKGROUND: Despite the availability of effective treatments, many adults with asthma have uncontrolled asthma. Uncontrolled asthma can lead to severe exacerbations. This study aimed to determine the prevalence and predictors of uncontrolled asthma among adults (≥18 years) with current asthma in the United States. METHODS: We analyzed the 2019 Behavior Risk Factor Surveillance System Asthma Call-Back Survey data from 27 states. Asthma control status was classified as "well-controlled" or "uncontrolled" according to the National Asthma Education and Prevention guidelines. The study population consisted of 7937 adults (weighted n = 13,793,220) with current asthma. We used multivariable logistic regression models to identify predictors of uncontrolled asthma. RESULTS: Overall, 62 % of adults with asthma reported having uncontrolled asthma, and 26 % had emergency or urgent care visits or hospitalizations in the past year. Potentially modifiable risk factors associated with uncontrolled asthma included cost barriers to asthma-related healthcare (OR = 2.94; 95%CI 1.96-4.40), complementary and alternative medicine use (OR = 1.84; 95%CI 1.45-2.32), current smoking (OR = 2.25; 95%CI 1.48-3.44), obesity (OR = 1.39; 95%CI 1.02-1.89), COPD (OR = 1.98; 95%CI 1.43-2.74), depression (OR = 1.47; 95%CI 1.16-1.88), fair/poor general health (OR = 1.54; 95%CI 1.14-2.07), household income <$15,000 (OR = 2.59; 95%CI 1.42-4.71), and less than high school education (OR = 2.59; 95%CI 1.42-4.71). Non-modifiable risk factor was Hispanic ethnicity (OR = 1.73; 95%CI 1.09-2.73). CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that uncontrolled asthma is common among adults and can be impacted by several factors. Effective asthma control programs are needed to improve asthma management and reduce unnecessary healthcare utilization.

Asthma Management Considerations for the Otolaryngologist: Current Therapies.

Asthma is frequently comorbid with chronic rhinosinusitis. First-line pharmacologic intervention for asthma includes combination-inhaled corticosteroids with a long-acting-ß-agonist, preferably formoterol. Although short-acting-ß-agonists have historically been used as sole rescue option, studies show that this approach can lead to more asthma-related exacerbations and greater mortality. Similarly, oral corticosteroids should be used sparingly due to their significant adverse effect profile. Nonpharmacological interventions for asthma include counseling on modifiable risk factors, such as smoking, physical activity, occupational exposures, and healthy diets. Management of patients with unified airway disease should incorporate a multidisciplinary team consisting of otolaryngologists and asthma specialists.

An insight into biosensing platforms used for the diagnosis of various lung diseases: A review.

Many of the infectious diseases are ubiquitous in nature and pose a threat to global and public health. The original cause for such type of serious maladies can be summarized as the scarcity of appropriate analysis and treatment methods. Pulmonary diseases are considered one of the life-threatening lung diseases that affect millions of people globally. It consists of several types, namely, asthma, lung cancer, tuberculosis, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and several respiratory-related infections. This is due to the limited access to well-equipped healthcare facilities for early disease diagnosis. This needs the availability of processes and technologies that can help to stop this harmful disease-diagnosing practice. Various approaches for diagnosing various lung diseases have been developed over time, namely, autopsy, chest X-rays, low-dose CT scans, and so forth. The need of the hour is to develop a rapid, simple, portable, and low-cost method for the diagnosis of pulmonary diseases. So nowadays, biosensors have been becoming one of the highest priority research areas as a potentially useful tool for the early diagnosis and detection of many pulmonary lung diseases. In this review article, various types of biosensors and their applications in the diagnosis of lung-related disorders are expansively explained.

Allergy and Asthma Prevalence and Management Across Nasal Polyp Subtypes.

Allergy and asthma prevalence vary across different subsets of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis. In this article, the authors investigate the management of allergy and asthma within populations of patients with aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease, allergic fungal rhinosinusitis, and central compartment atopic disease. Topical steroids, nasal rinses, and endoscopic sinus surgery are frequently employed in the management of nasal polyposis. Further, other causes of upper and lower airway inflammation like allergy and asthma should be considered in the overall treatment plan in order to optimize outcomes.

Treatable traits models of care.

Treatable traits is a personalized approach to the management of respiratory disease. The approach involves a multidimensional assessment to understand the traits present in individual patients. Traits are phenotypic and endotypic characteristics that can be identified, are clinically relevant and can be successfully treated by therapy to improve clinical outcomes. Identification of traits is followed by individualized and targeted treatment to those traits. First proposed for the management of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) the approach is recommended in many other areas of respiratory and now immunology medicine. Models of care for treatable traits have been proposed in different diseases and health care setting. In asthma and COPD traits are identified in three domains including pulmonary, extrapulmonary and behavioural/lifestyle/risk-factors. In bronchiectasis and interstitial lung disease, a fourth domain of aetiological traits has been proposed. As the core of treatable traits is personalized and individualized medicine; there are several key aspects to treatable traits models of care that should be considered in the delivery of care. These include person centredness, consideration of patients' values, needs and preferences, health literacy and engagement. We review the models of care that have been proposed and provide guidance on the engagement of patients in this approach to care.

Weight Loss Interventions for Adults With Obesity-Related Asthma.

Obesity is a common asthma comorbidity in adults, contributing to higher patient morbidity and mortality. Conversely, weight loss can reduce the impact of obesity on asthma and improve patient outcomes by diverse mechanisms including modulating airway inflammation, reducing oxidative stress, and improving lung function. Multiple lifestyle, nonpharmacological, pharmacological, and surgical interventions are effective at reducing weight in the general population. Fewer have been studied specifically in the context of patients with asthma. However, increasingly effective pharmacologic options for weight loss highlight the need for allergists and pulmonologists to understand the range of approaches that may directly or indirectly yield clinical benefits in asthma management. Weight loss interventions often require multidisciplinary support to create strategies that can realistically achieve a patient's personalized asthma and weight goals. This includes minimizing the adverse weight effects of glucocorticoids, which remain a mainstay of asthma management. Disparities in access, cost, and insurance coverage of weight loss interventions remain acute challenges for providers and patients. Future studies are needed to elucidate mechanisms of action of specific weight loss interventions on short-term and long-term asthma outcomes.

Strong and graded associations between level of asthma severity and all-cause hospital care use and costs in the UK.

BACKGROUND: Hospital admissions account for a large share of the healthcare costs incurred by people with asthma. We assessed the hospital care use and costs associated with asthma severity using the UK Biobank cohort and linked healthcare data. METHODS: Adult participants with asthma at recruitment were classified using their prescription data into mild and moderate-to-severe asthma and matched separately to asthma-free controls by age, sex, ethnicity and location. The associations of asthma, by severity, with the annual number of all-cause hospital admissions, days spent in hospital and hospital costs were estimated over a 10-year follow-up period using three specifications of negative binomial regression models that differed according to the sociodemographic and clinical characteristics adjusted for. RESULTS: Of the 25 031 participants with active asthma, 80% had mild asthma and 20% had moderate-to-severe asthma. Compared with participants with mild asthma, those with moderate-to-severe asthma were on average 2.7 years older, more likely to be current (13.7% vs 10.4%) or previous (40.2% vs 35.2%) smokers, to have a higher body mass index (BMI), and to be suffering from a variety of comorbid diseases. Following adjustments for age, sex, ethnicity and location, people with mild asthma experienced on average 36% more admissions (95% CI 28% to 40%), 43% more days in hospital (95% CI 35% to 51%) and 36% higher hospital costs (95% CI 31% to 41%) annually than asthma-free individuals, while people with moderate-to-severe asthma experienced excesses of 93% (95% CI 81% to 107%), 142% (95% CI 124% to 162%) and 98% (95% CI 88% to 108%), respectively. Further adjustments for socioeconomic deprivation, smoking status, BMI and comorbidities resulted in smaller though still highly significant positive associations, graded by severity, between asthma and hospital use and costs. CONCLUSIONS: Strong graded associations are reported between asthma severity and the extent of hospital use and costs in the UK. These findings could inform future assessments of the value of asthma management interventions.

[Control de asma grave predominantemente eosinofílica con el uso de anti IL-5].

Background: Asthma is a chronic inflammatory disease of the airways, caused by inflammatory cells and mediators, associated with smooth muscle dysfunction, causing variable airflow obstruction. With high, low and mixed type 2 immunoinflammatory mechanisms (endotypes). Severe asthma is that which requires step 4 or 5 of treatment (GINA 2023). The TH2 High phenotype, non-allergic with eosinophilia and FENO, is the second most common. It affects 300 million people around the world. Objetive: Describe asthma biomarkers after the use of antiinterleukin 5, Benralizumab, in adults with severe asthma. Methods: Case report, descriptive study. Patients with severe eosinophilic asthma and chronic polyposis rhinosinusitis under treatment with anti-IL5 were included, evaluating inflammatory biomarkers. Results: Serum eosinophils, FENO, ACT, spirometry, and exacerbations were measured in 8 patients at baseline and 6 months after treatment. The FEV1-FVC was 51% with improvement up to 95% later. 5 patients had FENO > 45 ppm subsequently only 3 continued to be inflamed. Eosinophilia 150 cells and subsequently only 1 patient persisted with eosinophilia 200 cells. Initial ACT < 19 in 7 patients Final ACT >19 in 7 patients. Exacerbations 8 patients with 2 or more exacerba- tions subsequently only 1 patient presented exacerbation. Conclusion: The use of anti-interleukin 5 (benralizumab) does reduce inflammatory markers, improves control and number of exacerbations in the short term. Monoclonal antibodies (Anti IL-5), if they improve inflammatory biomarkers, if clinical characteristics and inflammatory biomarkers are taken into account, it favors adequate asthma control.

Antecedentes: El asma es una enfermedad inflamatoria crónica de vías respiratorias, provocada por células y mediadores inflamatorios, asociado a disfunción del músculo liso, provocando obstrucción variable del flujo aereo. Con mecanismos inmunoinflamatorios tipo 2 altos, bajos y mixtos (endotipos). Asma grave es aquella que requiere paso 4 o 5 de tratamiento (GINA 2023). El fenotipo TH2 Alto, no alergico con eosinofilia y FENO, es el segundo más común. Afecta a 300 millones de personas alrededor del mundo. Objetivo: Describir biomarcadores de asma, posterior al uso de antiinterleucina 5, Benralizumab, en adultos con asma grave. Métodos: Reporte de casos, estudio descriptivo. Se incluyeron pacientes con asma grave eosinofilica y rinosinusitis crónica poliposica en tratamiento con an- ti-IL5, evaluando biomarcadores inflamatorios Resultados: En 8 pacientes se midieron eosinófilos séricos, FENO, ACT, espirometría y exacerbaciones al inicio y 6 meses después del tratamiento. El FEV1-FVC fue 51% con mejoría hasta 95% después. 5 pacientes tenían FENO >45 ppm posteriormente solo 3 continuron inflamados. Eosinofilia 150 células y posterior- mente solo 1 paciente persistió con eosinofilia 200 células. ACT inicial < 19 en 7 pacientes ACT final > 19 en 7 pacientes. Exacerbaciones 8 pacientes con 2 o más exacerbaciones posteriormente solo 1 paciente presentó exacerbación. Conclusión: El uso de antiinterleucina 5 (Benralizumab) si disminuye marcadores inflamatorios, mejora el control y número de exacerbaciones a corto plazo. Los anticuerpos monoclonales (Anti IL-5), si mejoran biomarcadores inflamatorios si se toman en cuenta caracteristicas clínicas y biomarcadores inflamatorios favorece adecuado control de asma.

Mobile health applications designed for self-management of chronic pulmonary diseases in children and adolescents: a systematic mapping review.

OBJECTIVE: Mobile health (mHealth) applications are scarce for children and adolescents with chronic pulmonary diseases (CPDs). This study aimed to map and describe the contents of the mHealth apps available for use in children and adolescents with CPDs. METHODS: We performed a systematic mapping review of published scientific literature in PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Library by February of 2023, using relevant keywords. Inclusion criteria were as follows: children aged < 18 years with CPDs; and studies published in English on mHealth apps. RESULTS: A total number of 353 studies were found, 9 of which met the inclusion criteria. These studies described seven mHealth apps for Android and iOS, designed either for asthma (n = 5) or for cystic fibrosis (n = 2). Five content areas were identified: education/information; pharmacological treatment; emergency; support; and non-pharmacological treatment. The studies (4, 2, and 3, respectively) showed consistent findings using qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methodologies. CONCLUSIONS: This mapping review provided a guided selection of the most appropriate mHealth apps for use in children and adolescents with CPDs based on the needs of each target population. However, these mHealth apps have limited capabilities to reinforce disease self-management and provide information related to treatment compliance.

Macrophages, MIFs, and MSCs: Defining an MOA in murine experimental asthma.

The mechanistically defined attributes of primed MSCs as here described not only provide a novel use case of MIF activated MSCs that can address the potency shortcomings of generic culture-adapted MSCs for acute lung injury but also provide some intriguing "Rosetta Stone" insights on plausible in vivo physiology of MSCs with host innate effectors such as macrophages in response to inflammation.

News in respiratory medicine.

Pneumology and phthisiology (respiratory medicine) has undergone dynamic development in the last two decades. The main focus of pulmonology in the past was care for patients with tuberculosis and pneumonia. Since then, respiratory medicine evolved and the current focus is on chronic pulmonary diseases, including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, bronchial asthma, interstitial lung diseases, but also on acute lung conditions (e.g., pneumonia, pleural diseases, respiratory failure), pneumooncology or highly specialized care for rare lung diseases (e.g., cystic fibrosis, rare interstitial diseases). Bronchology, interventional pneumology and pulmonary function testing are also important components of respiratory medicine. The importance of respiratory medicine was apparent during the COVID-19 pandemic. In this article, we provide a brief overview of the most important news to the field of respiratory medicine in the year 2022, addressing the thematic areas of bronchology, cystic fibrosis, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, asthma, interstitial lung diseases, pleural diseases, pneumooncology, tuberculosis and non-tuberculous mycobacteria.