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).

[Patient-Reported Outcomes (PROs) 3 and 6 Months After Pulmonary Rehabilitation Following COVID-19]. / Patient-Reported Outcomes (PROs) 3 und 6 Monate nach pneumologischer Post-COVID-Rehabilitation.

PURPOSE: If COVID-19 disease sequelae also (co-)affect the respiratory organs, national and international guidelines recommend pulmonary rehabilitation (PR). So far, however, no studies are available from Germany on the course after PR, nor on possible course differences between the two Long COVID subgroups "Ongoing symptomatic COVID-19" and "Post-COVID-19 syndrome" (PCS). METHODS: In a prospective observational study, patient-reported outcomes (PROs) regarding exertional dyspnea, quality of life, pain, fatigue, depression, and anxiety were assessed at the beginning of PR (T1), end of PR (T2), and after 3 (T3) and 6 months (T4). Statistical analyses were performed using latent difference models. RESULTS: There were 224 rehabilitation patients (MAge=54.4; SDAge=10.4; 42.0% female) included in the study. During PR, all PROs improved significantly. After PR, improvements either persisted with large pre-post effect sizes (exertional dyspnea, quality of life), decreased slightly to small pre-post effect sizes (depression, fatigue), or decreased to baseline levels (anxiety, pain). PCS patients had greater burdens in depression, fatigue, and pain at baseline, but did not differ in trajectories. Indicators of the severity of the preceding acute phase (oxygen therapy, ICU treatment, ventilation) were associated with higher burdens at T0 in depression, fatigue, and pain, but not with the courses during and after PR. In contrast, female patients showed higher burdens in both depression and fatigue at T1 and higher pre-post effects than male patients. CONCLUSION: The fact that improvements in PROs occurred in both subgroups only during PR, but not during the follow-up period suggests that the changes are not due to the natural healing process but at least partly due to PR. Moreover, the results suggest that both patient groups may benefit from PR. Persisting improvements in exertional dyspnea and quality of life and, to a reduced extent, in depression and fatigue until 6 months after PR, but not in pain and anxiety warrant study of additional multimodal interventions that may be needed to maintain these effects.

Negative association between fatigue and signs of sleep apnoea in patients after COVID-19.

Compared to the general population, there are increased apnoea-hypopnoea indices in patients recovering from #COVID19, yet there is a negative correlation to symptoms of fatigue and no significant correlation to daytime sleepiness https://bit.ly/3pEl9C8.

Effectiveness of a Three-Week Inpatient Pulmonary Rehabilitation Program for Patients after COVID-19: A Prospective Observational Study.

For COVID-19 patients who remain symptomatic after the acute phase, pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) is recommended. However, only a few studies have investigated the effectiveness of PR, especially considering the duration between the acute phase of COVID-19 and the onset of rehabilitation, as well as the initial severity. This prospective observational study evaluated the efficacy of PR in patients after COVID-19. A total of 120 still-symptomatic patients referred for PR after overcoming acute COVID-19 were asked to participate, of whom 108 (mean age 55.6 ± 10.1 years, 45.4% female) consented. The patients were assigned to three groups according to the time of referral and initial disease severity (severe acute; severe after interval; mild after interval). The primary outcome was dyspnea. Secondary outcomes included other respiratory disease symptoms, physical capacity, lung function, fatigue, quality of life (QoL), depression, and anxiety. Furthermore, patients rated the overall effectiveness of PR and their subjective change in health status. At the end of PR, we detected improvements with large effect sizes in exertional dyspnea, physical capacity, QoL, fatigue, and depression in the overall group. Other parameters changed with small to medium effect sizes. PR was effective after acute COVID-19 in all three groups analyzed.