Global mortality and readmission rates following COPD exacerbation-related hospitalisation: a meta-analysis of 65 945 individual patients.

Background: Exacerbations of COPD (ECOPD) have a major impact on patients and healthcare systems across the world. Precise estimates of the global burden of ECOPD on mortality and hospital readmission are needed to inform policy makers and aid preventive strategies to mitigate this burden. The aims of the present study were to explore global in-hospital mortality, post-discharge mortality and hospital readmission rates after ECOPD-related hospitalisation using an individual patient data meta-analysis (IPDMA) design. Methods: A systematic review was performed identifying studies that reported in-hospital mortality, post-discharge mortality and hospital readmission rates following ECOPD-related hospitalisation. Data analyses were conducted using a one-stage random-effects meta-analysis model. This study was conducted and reported in accordance with the PRISMA-IPD statement. Results: Data of 65 945 individual patients with COPD were analysed. The pooled in-hospital mortality rate was 6.2%, pooled 30-, 90- and 365-day post-discharge mortality rates were 1.8%, 5.5% and 10.9%, respectively, and pooled 30-, 90- and 365-day hospital readmission rates were 7.1%, 12.6% and 32.1%, respectively, with noticeable variability between studies and countries. Strongest predictors of mortality and hospital readmission included noninvasive mechanical ventilation and a history of two or more ECOPD-related hospitalisations <12 months prior to the index event. Conclusions: This IPDMA stresses the poor outcomes and high heterogeneity of ECOPD-related hospitalisation across the world. Whilst global standardisation of the management and follow-up of ECOPD-related hospitalisation should be at the heart of future implementation research, policy makers should focus on reimbursing evidence-based therapies that decrease (recurrent) ECOPD.

Federated benchmarking of medical artificial intelligence with MedPerf.

Medical artificial intelligence (AI) has tremendous potential to advance healthcare by supporting and contributing to the evidence-based practice of medicine, personalizing patient treatment, reducing costs, and improving both healthcare provider and patient experience. Unlocking this potential requires systematic, quantitative evaluation of the performance of medical AI models on large-scale, heterogeneous data capturing diverse patient populations. Here, to meet this need, we introduce MedPerf, an open platform for benchmarking AI models in the medical domain. MedPerf focuses on enabling federated evaluation of AI models, by securely distributing them to different facilities, such as healthcare organizations. This process of bringing the model to the data empowers each facility to assess and verify the performance of AI models in an efficient and human-supervised process, while prioritizing privacy. We describe the current challenges healthcare and AI communities face, the need for an open platform, the design philosophy of MedPerf, its current implementation status and real-world deployment, our roadmap and, importantly, the use of MedPerf with multiple international institutions within cloud-based technology and on-premises scenarios. Finally, we welcome new contributions by researchers and organizations to further strengthen MedPerf as an open benchmarking platform.

Exhaled gases and the potential for cross-infection via noninvasive ventilation machines.

Guidelines suggest that exhaled gases do not reach the outlet of noninvasive ventilators in clinical use. In this study, when tidal volumes exceeded 800 mL, exhaled gases did reach the ventilator, leading to a risk of cross-infection between users. https://bit.ly/3EdvtY6.

Uptake of Clinical Prognostic Tools in COPD Exacerbations Requiring Hospitalisation.

Clinical prognostic tools are used to objectively predict outcomes in many fields of medicine. Whilst over 400 have been developed for use in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), only a minority have undergone full external validation and just one, the DECAF score, has undergone an implementation study supporting use in clinical practice. Little is known about how such tools are used in the UK. We distributed surveys at two time points, in 2017 and 2019, to hospitals included in the Royal College of Physicians of London national COPD secondary care audit program. The survey assessed the use of prognostic tools in routine care of hospitalized COPD patients. Hospital response rates were 71/196 in 2017 and 72/196 in 2019. The use of the DECAF and PEARL scores more than doubled in decisions about unsupported discharge (7%-15.3%), admission avoidance (8.1%-17%) and readmission avoidance (4.8%-13.1%); it more than tripled (8.8%-27.8%) in decisions around hospital-at-home or early supported discharge schemes. In other areas, routine use of clinical prognostic tools was uncommon. In palliative care decisions, the use of the Gold Standards Framework Prognostic Indicator Guidance fell (5.6%-1.4%). In 2017, 43.7% of hospitals used at least one clinical prognostic tool in routine COPD care, increasing to 52.1% in 2019. Such tools can help challenge prognostic pessimism and improve care. To integrate these further into routine clinical care, future research should explore current barriers to their use and focus on implementation studies.Supplemental data for this article is available online at https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15412555.2021.1959540.

The Noninvasive Ventilation Outcomes (NIVO) score: prediction of in-hospital mortality in exacerbations of COPD requiring assisted ventilation.

INTRODUCTION: Acute exacerbations of COPD (AECOPD) complicated by acute (acidaemic) hypercapnic respiratory failure (AHRF) requiring ventilation are common. When applied appropriately, ventilation substantially reduces mortality. Despite this, there is evidence of poor practice and prognostic pessimism. A clinical prediction tool could improve decision making regarding ventilation, but none is routinely used. METHODS: Consecutive patients admitted with AECOPD and AHRF treated with assisted ventilation (principally noninvasive ventilation) were identified in two hospitals serving differing populations. Known and potential prognostic indices were identified a priori. A prediction tool for in-hospital death was derived using multivariable regression analysis. Prospective, external validation was performed in a temporally separate, geographically diverse 10-centre study. The trial methodology adhered to TRIPOD (Transparent Reporting of a Multivariable Prediction Model for Individual Prognosis or Diagnosis) recommendations. RESULTS: Derivation cohort: n=489, in-hospital mortality 25.4%; validation cohort: n=733, in-hospital mortality 20.1%. Using six simple categorised variables (extended Medical Research Council Dyspnoea score 1-4/5a/5b, time from admission to acidaemia >12 h, pH <7.25, presence of atrial fibrillation, Glasgow coma scale ≤14 and chest radiograph consolidation), a simple scoring system with strong prediction of in-hospital mortality is achieved. The resultant Noninvasive Ventilation Outcomes (NIVO) score had area under the receiver operating curve of 0.79 and offers good calibration and discrimination across stratified risk groups in its validation cohort. DISCUSSION: The NIVO score outperformed pre-specified comparator scores. It is validated in a generalisable cohort and works despite the heterogeneity inherent to both this patient group and this intervention. Potential applications include informing discussions with patients and their families, aiding treatment escalation decisions, challenging pessimism and comparing risk-adjusted outcomes across centres.

COVID-19 and pneumothorax: a multicentre retrospective case series.

INTRODUCTION: Pneumothorax and pneumomediastinum have both been noted to complicate cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) requiring hospital admission. We report the largest case series yet described of patients with both these pathologies (including nonventilated patients). METHODS: Cases were collected retrospectively from UK hospitals with inclusion criteria limited to a diagnosis of COVID-19 and the presence of either pneumothorax or pneumomediastinum. Patients included in the study presented between March and June 2020. Details obtained from the medical record included demographics, radiology, laboratory investigations, clinical management and survival. RESULTS: 71 patients from 16 centres were included in the study, of whom 60 had pneumothoraces (six with pneumomediastinum in addition) and 11 had pneumomediastinum alone. Two of these patients had two distinct episodes of pneumothorax, occurring bilaterally in sequential fashion, bringing the total number of pneumothoraces included to 62. Clinical scenarios included patients who had presented to hospital with pneumothorax, patients who had developed pneumothorax or pneumomediastinum during their inpatient admission with COVID-19 and patients who developed their complication while intubated and ventilated, either with or without concurrent extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. Survival at 28 days was not significantly different following pneumothorax (63.1±6.5%) or isolated pneumomediastinum (53.0±18.7%; p=0.854). The incidence of pneumothorax was higher in males. 28-day survival was not different between the sexes (males 62.5±7.7% versus females 68.4±10.7%; p=0.619). Patients aged ≥70 years had a significantly lower 28-day survival than younger individuals (≥70 years 41.7±13.5% survival versus <70 years 70.9±6.8% survival; p=0.018 log-rank). CONCLUSION: These cases suggest that pneumothorax is a complication of COVID-19. Pneumothorax does not seem to be an independent marker of poor prognosis and we encourage continuation of active treatment where clinically possible.

Predictors of NIV Treatment in Patients with COPD Exacerbation Complicated by Respiratory Acidaemia.

Non-invasive ventilation (NIV) treatment decisions are poorly understood for patients with COPD exacerbation complicated by acute hypercapnic respiratory failure and respiratory acidaemia (ECOPD-RA). We identified 420 NIV-eligible patients from the DECAF study cohorts admitted with an ECOPD-RA. Using bivariate and multivariate analyses, we examined which indices were associated with clinicians' decisions to start NIV, including whether the presence of pneumonia was a deterrent. Admitting hospital, admission from institutional care, partial pressure of oxygen, cerebrovascular disease, pH, systolic blood pressure and white cell count were all associated with the provision of NIV. Of these indices, only pH was also a predictor of inpatient death. Those not treated with NIV included those with milder acidaemia and higher (and sometimes excessive) oxygen levels, and a frailer population with higher Extended Medical Research Council Dyspnoea scores, presumably deemed not suitable for NIV. Pneumonia was not associated with NIV treatment; 34 of 111 (30.6%) NIV-untreated patients had pneumonia, whilst 107 of 309 (34.6%) NIV-treated patients had pneumonia (p = 0.483). In our study, one in four NIV-eligible patients were not treated with NIV. Clinicians' NIV treatment decisions are not based on those indices most strongly associated with mortality risk. One of the strongest predictors of whether a patient received a life-saving treatment is which hospital they attended. Further research is required to aid in the risk stratification of this patient group which may help standardise and improve care.

Improved survival following ward-based non-invasive pressure support for severe hypoxia in a cohort of frail patients with COVID-19: retrospective analysis from a UK teaching hospital.

Since the outbreak of COVID-19 in China in December 2019, a pandemic has rapidly developed on a scale that has overwhelmed health services in a number of countries. COVID-19 has the potential to lead to severe hypoxia; this is usually the cause of death if it occurs. In a substantial number of patients, adequate arterial oxygenation cannot be achieved with supplementary oxygen therapy alone. To date, there has been no clear guideline endorsement of ward-based non-invasive pressure support (NIPS) for severely hypoxic patients who are deemed unlikely to benefit from invasive ventilation. We established a ward-based NIPS service for COVID-19 PCR-positive patients, with severe hypoxia, and in whom escalation to critical care for invasive ventilation was not deemed appropriate. A retrospective analysis of survival in these patients was undertaken. Twenty-eight patients were included. Ward-based NIPS for severe hypoxia was associated with a 50% survival in this cohort. This compares favourably with Intensive Care National Audit and Research Centre survival data following invasive ventilation in a less frail, less comorbid and younger population. These results suggest that ward-based NIPS should be considered as a treatment option in an integrated escalation strategy in all units managing respiratory failure secondary to COVID-19.

Effect of portable non-invasive ventilation on exercise tolerance in COPD: One size does not fit all.

In a cross-over RCT, portable NIV (pNIV) reduced dynamic hyperinflation (DH) compared to pursed lip breathing (PLB) during recovery from intermittent exercise in COPD, but not consistently in all subjects. In this post-hoc analysis, DH response was defined as a reduction ≥4.5 % of predicted resting inspiratory capacity with pNIV compared to PLB. At exercise iso-time (where work completed was consistent between pNIV and PLB), 8/24 patients were DH non-responders (DH: 240 ± 40 mL, p = 0.001 greater using pNIV). 16/24 were DH responders (DH: 220 ± 50 mL, p = 0.001 lower using pNIV). Compared to DH responders, DH non-responders exhibited greater resting DH (RV/TLC: 65 ± 4% versus 56 ± 2%; p = 0.028) and did not improve exercise tolerance (pNIV: 30.9 ± 3.4 versus PLB: 29.9 ± 3.3 min; p = 0.603). DH responders increased exercise tolerance (pNIV: 34.9 ± 2.4 versus PLB: 27.1 ± 2.3 min; p = 0.001). Resting RV/TLC% was negatively associated with the magnitude of DH when using pNIV compared to PLB (r=-0.42; p = 0.043). Patients with profound DH were less likely to improve exercise tolerance with pNIV. Further studies using auto-adjusted ventilators are warranted.

Intermittent Use of Portable NIV Increases Exercise Tolerance in COPD: A Randomised, Cross-Over Trial.

During exercise, non-invasive ventilation (NIV) prolongs endurance in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), but routine use is impractical. The VitaBreath device provides portable NIV (pNIV); however, it can only be used during recovery. We assessed the effect of pNIV compared to pursed lip breathing (PLB) on exercise tolerance. Twenty-four COPD patients were randomised to a high-intensity (HI: 2-min at 80% peak work rate (WRpeak) alternated with 2-min recovery; n = 13), or a moderate-intensity (MOD: 6-min at 60% WRpeak alternated with 2-min recovery; n = 11) protocol, and within these groups two tests were performed using pNIV and PLB during recovery in balanced order. Upon completion, patients were provided with pNIV; use over 12 weeks was assessed. Compared to PLB, pNIV increased exercise tolerance (HI: by 5.2 ± 6.0 min; MOD: by 5.8 ± 6.7 min) (p < 0.05). With pNIV, mean inspiratory capacity increased and breathlessness decreased by clinically meaningful margins during recovery compared to the end of exercise (HI: by 140 ± 110 mL and 1.2 ± 1.7; MOD: by 170 ± 80 mL and 1.0 ± 0.7). At 12 weeks, patients reported that pNIV reduced anxiety (median: 7.5/10 versus 4/10, p = 0.001) and recovery time from breathlessness (17/24 patients; p = 0.002); 23/24 used the device at least weekly. pNIV increased exercise tolerance by reducing dynamic hyperinflation and breathlessness in COPD patients.

Specialist emergency care and COPD outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: In exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (ECOPD) requiring hospitalisation greater access to respiratory specialists improves outcome, but is not consistently delivered. The UK National Confidential Enquiry into Patient Outcome and Death 2015 enquiry showed over 25% of patients receiving acute non-invasive ventilation (NIV) for ECOPD died in hospital. On 16 June 2015 the Northumbria Specialist Emergency Care Hospital (NSECH) opened, introducing 24/7 specialty consultant on-call, direct admission from the emergency department to specialty wards and 7-day consultant review. A Respiratory Support Unit opened for patients requiring NIV. Before NSECH the NIV service included mandated training and competency assessment, 24/7 single point of access, initiation of ventilation in the emergency department, a door-to-mask time target, early titration of ventilation pressures and structured weaning. Pneumonia or hypercapnic coma complicating ECOPD have never been considered contraindications to NIV. After NSECH staff-patient ratios increased, the NIV pathway was streamlined and structured daily multidisciplinary review introduced. We compared our outcomes with historical and national data. METHODS: Patients hospitalised with ECOPD between 1 January 2013 and 31 December 2016 were identified from coding, with ventilation status and radiological consolidation confirmed from records. Age, gender, admission from nursing home, consolidation, revised Charlson Index, key comorbidities, length of stay, and inpatient and 30-day mortality were captured. Outcomes pre-NSECH and post-NSECH opening were compared and independent predictors of survival identified via logistic regression. RESULTS: There were 6291 cases. 24/7 specialist emergency care was a strong independent predictor of lower mortality. Length of stay reduced by 1 day, but 90-day readmission rose in both ventilated and non-ventilated patients. CONCLUSION: Provision of 24/7 respiratory specialist emergency care improved ECOPD survival and shortened length of stay for both non-ventilated and ventilated patients. The potential implications in respect to service design and provision nationally are substantial and challenging.

Using Smartphones to Collect Behavioral Data in Psychological Science: Opportunities, Practical Considerations, and Challenges.

Smartphones now offer the promise of collecting behavioral data unobtrusively, in situ, as it unfolds in the course of daily life. Data can be collected from the onboard sensors and other phone logs embedded in today's off-the-shelf smartphone devices. These data permit fine-grained, continuous collection of people's social interactions (e.g., speaking rates in conversation, size of social groups, calls, and text messages), daily activities (e.g., physical activity and sleep), and mobility patterns (e.g., frequency and duration of time spent at various locations). In this article, we have drawn on the lessons from the first wave of smartphone-sensing research to highlight areas of opportunity for psychological research, present practical considerations for designing smartphone studies, and discuss the ongoing methodological and ethical challenges associated with research in this domain. It is our hope that these practical guidelines will facilitate the use of smartphones as a behavioral observation tool in psychological science.