Admission COVID-19 clinical risk assessment for guiding patient placement and diagnostic testing strategy.

INTRODUCTION: Without universal access to point-of-care SARS-CoV-2 testing, many hospitals rely on clinical judgement alone for identifying cases of COVID-19 early. METHODS: Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust introduced a 'traffic light' clinical judgement aid to the COVID-19 admissions unit in mid-March 2020. Ability to accurately predict COVID-19 was audited retrospectively across different stages of the epidemic. RESULTS: One SARS-CoV-2 PCR positive patient (1/41, 2%) was misallocated to a 'green' (non-COVID-19) area during the first period of observation, and no patients (0/32, 0%) were mislabelled 'green' during the second period. 33 of 62 (53%) labelled 'red' (high risk) tested SARS-CoV-2 PCR positive during the first period, while 5 of 22 (23%) 'red' patients were PCR positive in the second. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 clinical risk stratification on initial assessment effectively identifies non-COVID-19 patients. However, diagnosing COVID-19 is challenging and risk of overcalling COVID-19 should be recognised, especially when background prevalence is low.

Ethical principles and a practical approach to support policy making through the next phases of the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond.

There is an urgent need for an ethical framework to help us address the local and national challenges that we face as clinicians during the COVID-19 pandemic. We propose four key commitments from which a practical and consistent ethical approach can be derived. These commitments are to articulate the needs, rights and interests of the different stakeholders affected by any policy; to be accountable and transparent, recognising that people are autonomous individuals with values and concerns of their own; to consider the impact of our actions on the sustainability of the NHS, infrastructure, service demands and staff welfare; and to treat everybody equitably, with all deserving of consideration and care. Implementing these commitments will require a number of specific actions. We must put in place frameworks enabling clear advocacy for each competing objective; communicate policy and practice effectively to the public; promote integration of decision-making among social, primary, secondary and tertiary care and reduce or stop unnecessary or inefficient interventions; minimise health inequalities; and build spare capacity into the system.In this article, we expand on these actions, and note the legal context in which this would be delivered.

Risk assessment for hospital admission in patients with COPD; a multi-centre UK prospective observational study.

In chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), acute exacerbation of COPD requiring hospital admission is associated with mortality and healthcare costs. The ERICA study assessed multiple clinical measures in people with COPD, including the short physical performance battery (SPPB), a simple test of physical function with 3 components (gait speed, balance and sit-to-stand). We tested the hypothesis that SPPB score would relate to risk of hospital admissions and length of hospital stay. Data were analysed from 714 of the total 729 participants (434 men and 280 women) with COPD. Data from this prospective observational longitudinal study were obtained from 4 secondary and 1 tertiary centres from England, Scotland, and Wales. The main outcome measures were to estimate the risk of hospitalisation with acute exacerbation of COPD (AECOPD and length of hospital stay derived from hospital episode statistics (HES). In total, 291 of 714 individuals experienced 762 hospitalised AECOPD during five-year follow up. Poorer performance of SPPB was associated with both higher rate (IRR 1.08 per 1 point decrease, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.14) and increased length of stay (IRR 1.18 per 1 point decrease, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.27) for hospitalised AECOPD. For the individual sit-to-stand component of the SPPB, the association was even stronger (IRR 1.14, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.26 for rate and IRR 1.32, 95% CI 1.16 to 1.49 for length of stay for hospitalised AECOPD). The SPPB, and in particular the sit-to-stand component can both evaluate the risk of H-AECOPD and length of hospital stay in COPD. The SPPB can aid in clinical decision making and when prioritising healthcare resources.

Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing in the Assessment of Dysfunctional Breathing.

Dysfunctional breathing (DB) is a disabling condition which affects the biomechanical breathing pattern and is challenging to diagnose. It affects individuals in many circumstances, including those without underlying disease who may even be athletic in nature. DB can also aggravate the symptoms of those with established heart or lung conditions. However, it is treatable and individuals have much to gain if it is recognized appropriately. Here we consider the role of cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) in the identification and management of DB. Specifically, we have described the diagnostic criteria and presenting symptoms. We explored the physiology and pathophysiology of DB and physiological consequences in the context of exercise. We have provided examples of its interplay with co-morbidity in other chronic diseases such as asthma, pulmonary hypertension and left heart disease. We have discussed the problems with the current methods of diagnosis and proposed how CPET could improve this. We have provided guidance on how CPET can be used for diagnosis, including consideration of pattern recognition and use of specific data panels. We have considered categorization, e.g., predominant breathing pattern disorder or acute or chronic hyperventilation. We have explored the distinction from gas exchange or ventilation/perfusion abnormalities and described other potential pitfalls, such as false positives and periodic breathing. We have also illustrated an example of a clinical pathway utilizing CPET in the diagnosis and treatment of individuals with suspected DB.

What matters to people with COPD: outputs from Working Together for Change.

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) has a negative impact on people's quality of life affecting daily activities and mental and emotional well-being. Healthcare services need to understand what patients want and need. We used a co-production methodology, Working Together for Change, not previously used in a COPD setting to determine what matters to people with COPD. Forty patients took part in one-to-one discussions to identify what was working well, not working well and what was important for the future in terms of their COPD care. The responses were analysed in two one-day co-production workshops involving COPD patients, carers and professionals. The six highest priority themes around what's not working well were: 'I don't think the right hand knows what the left hand is doing', 'I can't get appointments when I want them', 'I'm not treated as a person', 'I can't do what I want to do', 'I'm anxious and depressed' and 'I can't eat well.' Professionals gained powerful insights into the difficulties of COPD through their interactions with patients in the workshops. What mattered to patients encompassed meaning, purpose and relationships beyond immediate medical needs and underlines the need for patient-centred holistic approaches to COPD care and support.

Developing an intervention to increase REferral and uptake TO pulmonary REhabilitation in primary care in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (the REsTORE study): mixed methods study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a progressive lung disease associated with breathlessness, inability to exercise, frequent infections, hospitalisation and reduced quality of life. Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR), providing supervised exercise and education, is an effective and cost-effective treatment for COPD but is significantly underused. Interventions to improve referral and uptake have been tested and some positive results reported. However, interventions are diverse and no clear recommendations for practice can be made. This study aims to understand the challenges to referral and uptake in primary care, where most referrals originate, and to develop a flexible toolkit of resources to support referral and uptake to PR in primary care in the UK. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a mixed methods study informed by normalisation process theory and burden of treatment theory. In the first phase, general practitioners, practice nurses and PR providers will be invited to complete an online survey to inform a broad exploration of the topic areas. In phase 2 interviews and focus groups will be conducted with patients, healthcare professionals (HCP) in primary care, PR providers and commissioners to gain an in-depth understanding of the issues and needs. Toolkit development in phase 3 will draw together the learning from phases 1 and 2 and employ an iterative development process to build the toolkit jointly with patients and HCPs. It will be tested in primary care for usability and acceptability. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has ethical and Health Research Authority approval (Research Ethics Committee reference number 17/EE/0136). It is registered with the International Standard Registered Clinical/Social Study Number (ISRCTN) registry (trial ID: ISRCTN20669629, assignment date 20 March 2018, trial start date 1 April 2016). Dissemination will be aimed at patients, carers/families, service providers, commissioners and national interest groups. Methods will include conferences, presentations, academic publications and plain English reports and will be supported by the British Lung Foundation. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN20669629 ; Pre-results.

The use of low-cost Android tablets to train community health workers in Mukono, Uganda, in the recognition, treatment and prevention of pneumonia in children under five: a pilot randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Since 2012, The World Health Organization and UNICEF have advocated for community health workers (CHWs) to be trained in Integrated Community Case Management (iCCM) of common childhood illnesses, such as pneumonia. Despite the effectiveness of iCCM, CHWs face many barriers to accessing training. This pilot study compares traditional training with using locally made videos loaded onto low-cost Android tablets to train CHWs on the pneumonia component of iCCM. METHODS: We conducted a pilot randomised controlled trial with CHWs in the Mukono District of Uganda. The unit of randomisation was the sub-county level, and the unit of analysis was at the level of the individual CHW. Eligible CHWs had completed basic iCCM training but had not received any refresher training on the pneumonia component of iCCM in the preceding 2 years. CHWs in the control group received training in the recognition, treatment, and prevention of pneumonia as it is currently delivered, through a 1-day, in-person workshop. CHWs allocated to the intervention group received training via locally made educational videos hosted on low-cost Android tablets. The primary outcome was change in knowledge acquisition, assessed through a multiple choice questionnaire before and after training, and a post-training clinical assessment. The secondary outcome was a qualitative evaluation of CHW experiences of using the tablet platform. RESULTS: In the study, 129 CHWs were enrolled, 66 and 63 in the control and intervention groups respectively. CHWs in both groups demonstrated an improvement in multiple choice question test scores before and after training; however, there was no statistically significant difference in the improvement between groups (t = 1.15, p = 0.254). There was a statistically significant positive correlation (Pearson's r = 0.26, p = 0.03) linking years of education to improvement in test scores in the control group, which was not present in the intervention group. The majority of CHWs expressed satisfaction with the use of tablets as a training tool; however, some reported technical issues (n = 9). CONCLUSION: Tablet-based training is comparable to traditional training in terms of knowledge acquisition. It also proved to be feasible and a satisfactory means of delivering training to CHWs. Further research is required to understand the impacts of scaling such an intervention. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registered on 23/11/2016 at clinicaltrials.gov ( NCT02971449 ).