Comparing performance of primary care clinicians in the interpretation of SPIROmetry with or without Artificial Intelligence Decision support software (SPIRO-AID): a protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Spirometry is a point-of-care lung function test that helps support the diagnosis and monitoring of chronic lung disease. The quality and interpretation accuracy of spirometry is variable in primary care. This study aims to evaluate whether artificial intelligence (AI) decision support software improves the performance of primary care clinicians in the interpretation of spirometry, against reference standard (expert interpretation). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A parallel, two-group, statistician-blinded, randomised controlled trial of primary care clinicians in the UK, who refer for, or interpret, spirometry. People with specialist training in respiratory medicine to consultant level were excluded. A minimum target of 228 primary care clinician participants will be randomised with a 1:1 allocation to assess fifty de-identified, real-world patient spirometry sessions through an online platform either with (intervention group) or without (control group) AI decision support software report. Outcomes will cover primary care clinicians' spirometry interpretation performance including measures of technical quality assessment, spirometry pattern recognition and diagnostic prediction, compared with reference standard. Clinicians' self-rated confidence in spirometry interpretation will also be evaluated. The primary outcome is the proportion of the 50 spirometry sessions where the participant's preferred diagnosis matches the reference diagnosis. Unpaired t-tests and analysis of covariance will be used to estimate the difference in primary outcome between intervention and control groups. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has been reviewed and given favourable opinion by Health Research Authority Wales (reference: 22/HRA/5023). Results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals, presented at relevant national and international conferences, disseminated through social media, patient and public routes and directly shared with stakeholders. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05933694.

Long-term impact of COVID-19 hospitalisation among individuals with pre-existing airway diseases in the UK: a multicentre, longitudinal cohort study - PHOSP-COVID.

Background: The long-term outcomes of COVID-19 hospitalisation in individuals with pre-existing airway diseases are unknown. Methods: Adult participants hospitalised for confirmed or clinically suspected COVID-19 and discharged between 5 March 2020 and 31 March 2021 were recruited to the Post-hospitalisation COVID-19 (PHOSP-COVID) study. Participants attended research visits at 5 months and 1 year post discharge. Clinical characteristics, perceived recovery, burden of symptoms and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of individuals with pre-existing airway disease (i.e., asthma, COPD or bronchiectasis) were compared to the non-airways group. Results: A total of 615 out of 2697 (22.8%) participants had a history of pre-existing airway diseases (72.0% diagnosed with asthma, 22.9% COPD and 5.1% bronchiectasis). At 1 year, the airways group participants were less likely to feel fully recovered (20.4% versus 33.2%, p<0.001), had higher burden of anxiety (29.1% versus 22.0%, p=0.002), depression (31.2% versus 24.7%, p=0.006), higher percentage of impaired mobility using short physical performance battery ≤10 (57.4% versus 45.2%, p<0.001) and 27% had a new disability (assessed by the Washington Group Short Set on Functioning) versus 16.6%, p=0.014. HRQoL assessed using EQ-5D-5L Utility Index was lower in the airways group (mean±SD 0.64±0.27 versus 0.73±0.25, p<0.001). Burden of breathlessness, fatigue and cough measured using a study-specific tool was higher in the airways group. Conclusion: Individuals with pre-existing airway diseases hospitalised due to COVID-19 were less likely to feel fully recovered, had lower physiological performance measurements, more burden of symptoms and reduced HRQoL up to 1 year post-hospital discharge.

Evidence for exercise-based interventions across 45 different long-term conditions: an overview of systematic reviews.

Background: Almost half of the global population face significant challenges from long-term conditions (LTCs) resulting in substantive health and socioeconomic burden. Exercise is a potentially key intervention in effective LTC management. Methods: In this overview of systematic reviews (SRs), we searched six electronic databases from January 2000 to October 2023 for SRs assessing health outcomes (mortality, hospitalisation, exercise capacity, disability, frailty, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and physical activity) related to exercise-based interventions in adults (aged >18 years) diagnosed with one of 45 LTCs. Methodological quality was assessed using AMSTAR-2. International Prospective Resister of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) ID: CRD42022319214. Findings: Forty-two SRs plus three supplementary RCTs were included, providing 990 RCTs in 936,825 people across 39 LTCs. No evidence was identified for six LTCs. Predominant outcome domains were HRQoL (82% of SRs/RCTs) and exercise capacity (66%); whereas disability, mortality, physical activity, and hospitalisation were less frequently reported (≤25%). Evidence supporting exercise-based interventions was identified in 25 LTCs, was unclear for 13 LTCs, and for one LTC suggested no effect. No SRs considered multimorbidity in the delivery of exercise. Methodological quality varied: critically-low (33%), low (26%), moderate (26%), and high (12%). Interpretation: Exercise-based interventions improve HRQoL and exercise capacity across numerous LTCs. Key evidence gaps included limited mortality and hospitalisation data and consideration of multimorbidity impact on exercise-based interventions. Funding: This study was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR; Personalised Exercise-Rehabilitation FOR people with Multiple long-term conditions (multimorbidity)-NIHR202020).

Protected characteristics reported in pulmonary rehabilitation: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: An individual's characteristics are reported to influence access, completion and outcomes of pulmonary rehabilitation and may contribute to health inequalities. Many countries have policies to promote equity among individuals' characteristics, including the UK Equality Act 2010 which lists nine protected characteristics (age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex and sexual orientation). OBJECTIVES: To describe the extent to which UK Equality Act 2010 protected characteristics have been collected and reported in UK studies and audits of pulmonary rehabilitation. METHODS: A scoping review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses for Scoping Reviews guidelines was conducted using five databases. UK studies and audits collecting data on pulmonary rehabilitation from 1 October 2010 (date of Equality Act 2010 inception) were eligible. The protected characteristics collected and how they were reported were extracted. RESULTS: Out of 45 included studies and audits (41 studies and four audits), 98% (k=44) reported age. Sex was reported in 40% (k=18), and 20% (k=9) reported gender with only male and female categories. Half (50%, k=2) of audits reported gender with male, female and transgender categories. Race was reported through ethnicity in 2% (k=1) of studies and 75% (k=3) of audits. No studies or audits explicitly reported disability, but all reported measures indicating disease severity (e.g. forced expiratory volume in 1 s % predicted: 67%, k=30). No studies or audits reported marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, religion or belief or sexual orientation. CONCLUSIONS: Protected characteristics are not commonly reported or are inconsistently reported in UK pulmonary rehabilitation studies and audits. Without reporting these characteristics, health inequalities in pulmonary rehabilitation will remain unclear.

Changes in fatigue symptoms following an exercise-based rehabilitation programme for patients with long COVID.

Background: There is evidence to support COVID-19 rehabilitation programmes improving persistent COVID-19 symptoms; however, there is concern that therapies that include an exercise component may increase fatigue and post-exertional symptom exacerbation (PESE). The objectives of the present study were to determine the effect of a 6-week COVID-19 rehabilitation programme on fatigue and PESE in individuals with ongoing COVID-19 symptoms. Methods: After a routine medical assessment, individuals with persistent COVID-19 symptoms were enrolled on a 6-week COVID-19 specific rehabilitation programme. The programme included symptom-titrated exercise, education and self-management advice. Fatigue was assessed pre- and post-programme using the Functional Assessment Chronic Illness Therapy Fatigue questionnaire (FACIT). Exercise capacity (Incremental and Endurance Shuttle Walking Test (ISWT and ESWT)) and PESE (DePaul Symptom Questionnaire (DSQ)) were also assessed pre- and post-programme. Composite scores were calculated for the frequency and severity domains of the DSQ. Results: 148 patients (median (IQR) age 59 (49-72) years, 82 (55%) female, 81 (54%) hospitalised) completed the COVID-19 rehabilitation programme. FACIT score was reduced pre- to post-programme by a mean (CI) change of -5 (-7- -4); p<0.01. Exercise capacity increased by 82 (65-99) m for the ISWT and 398 (333-462) s for the ESWT (n=148). PESE was assessed in 44 patients. The DSQ frequency and severity composite score improved by 20 (13-28) and 19 (13-26) points, respectively (p<0.01, n=44). Conclusion: These data demonstrate the potential benefits of a COVID-19 rehabilitation programme in improving fatigue, exercise capacity and symptom exacerbation in those with persistent COVID-19 symptoms.

DYNamic assessment of multi-organ level dysfunction in patients recovering from COVID-19: DYNAMO COVID-19.

We evaluated the impacts of COVID-19 on multi-organ and metabolic function in patients following severe hospitalised infection compared to controls. Patients (n = 21) without previous diabetes, cardiovascular or cerebrovascular disease were recruited 5-7 months post-discharge alongside controls (n = 10) with similar age, sex and body mass. Perceived fatigue was estimated (Fatigue Severity Scale) and the following were conducted: oral glucose tolerance (OGTT) alongside whole-body fuel oxidation, validated magnetic resonance imaging and spectroscopy during resting and supine controlled exercise, dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, short physical performance battery (SPPB), intra-muscular electromyography, quadriceps strength and fatigability, and daily step-count. There was a greater insulin response (incremental area under the curve, median (inter-quartile range)) during the OGTT in patients [18,289 (12,497-27,448) mIU/min/L] versus controls [8655 (7948-11,040) mIU/min/L], P < 0.001. Blood glucose response and fasting and post-prandial fuel oxidation rates were not different. This greater insulin resistance was not explained by differences in systemic inflammation or whole-body/regional adiposity, but step-count (P = 0.07) and SPPB scores (P = 0.004) were lower in patients. Liver volume was 28% greater in patients than controls, and fat fraction adjusted liver T1, a measure of inflammation, was raised in patients. Patients displayed greater perceived fatigue scores, though leg muscle volume, strength, force-loss, motor unit properties and post-exercise muscle phosphocreatine resynthesis were comparable. Further, cardiac and cerebral architecture and function (at rest and on exercise) were not different. In this cross-sectional study, individuals without known previous morbidity who survived severe COVID-19 exhibited greater insulin resistance, pointing to a need for physical function intervention in recovery.

Prevalence and prognostic importance of exercise limitation and physical inactivity in COPD.

Exercise limitation and physical inactivity are separate, but related constructs. Both are commonly present in individuals with COPD, contribute to disease burden over and above the respiratory impairments, and are independently predictive of adverse outcomes. Because of this, clinicians should consider assessing these variables in their patients with COPD. Field tests of exercise performance such as the 6-min walk test and the incremental and endurance shuttle walk tests require limited additional resources, and results correlate with negative outcomes. Laboratory measures of exercise performance using a treadmill or cycle ergometer assess exercise capacity, provide prognostic information and have the advantage of explaining physiological mechanisms (and their interactions) underpinning exercise limitation. Limitations in exercise capacity (i.e. "cannot do") and physical inactivity (i.e. "do not do") are both associated with mortality; exercise limitation appears to be the more important driver of this outcome.

The Rationale, Evidence, and Adaptations to Pulmonary Rehabilitation for Chronic Respiratory Diseases Other Than COPD.

Over the last 3 decades, pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) has become an integral part of the management of COPD. Many other chronic respiratory diseases have similar systemic manifestations including skeletal muscle impairment, commonly through deconditioning, and may benefit from PR. However, whereas many programs may accept patients with other respiratory diseases, the program may need several adaptations to optimally manage patients. This article uses the examples of interstitial lung disease including idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, bronchiectasis, pulmonary hypertension, post lung transplantation, and post-COVID condition to highlight exemplar clinical problems. In addition, the rationale and latest evidence for PR are described alongside the adaptations to the program, including education needs of the delivery team and close integrated care with the wider clinical team. Finally, future directions for clinical care and research are discussed.

Large-scale phenotyping of patients with long COVID post-hospitalization reveals mechanistic subtypes of disease.

One in ten severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infections result in prolonged symptoms termed long coronavirus disease (COVID), yet disease phenotypes and mechanisms are poorly understood1. Here we profiled 368 plasma proteins in 657 participants ≥3 months following hospitalization. Of these, 426 had at least one long COVID symptom and 233 had fully recovered. Elevated markers of myeloid inflammation and complement activation were associated with long COVID. IL-1R2, MATN2 and COLEC12 were associated with cardiorespiratory symptoms, fatigue and anxiety/depression; MATN2, CSF3 and C1QA were elevated in gastrointestinal symptoms and C1QA was elevated in cognitive impairment. Additional markers of alterations in nerve tissue repair (SPON-1 and NFASC) were elevated in those with cognitive impairment and SCG3, suggestive of brain-gut axis disturbance, was elevated in gastrointestinal symptoms. Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2-specific immunoglobulin G (IgG) was persistently elevated in some individuals with long COVID, but virus was not detected in sputum. Analysis of inflammatory markers in nasal fluids showed no association with symptoms. Our study aimed to understand inflammatory processes that underlie long COVID and was not designed for biomarker discovery. Our findings suggest that specific inflammatory pathways related to tissue damage are implicated in subtypes of long COVID, which might be targeted in future therapeutic trials.

Personalised Exercise-Rehabilitation FOR people with Multiple long-term conditions (PERFORM): protocol for a randomised feasibility trial.

INTRODUCTION: Personalised Exercise-Rehabilitation FOR people with Multiple long-term conditions (PERFORM) is a research programme that seeks to develop and evaluate a comprehensive exercise-based rehabilitation intervention designed for people with multimorbidity, the presence of multiple long-term conditions (MLTCs). This paper describes the protocol for a randomised trial to assess the feasibility and acceptability of the PERFORM intervention, study design and processes. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A multicentre, parallel two-group randomised trial with individual 2:1 allocation to the PERFORM exercise-based intervention plus usual care (intervention) or usual care alone (control). The primary outcome of this feasibility trial will be to assess whether prespecified progression criteria (recruitment, retention, intervention adherence) are met to progress to the full randomised trial. The trial will be conducted across three UK sites and 60 people with MLTCs, defined as two or more LTCs, with at least one having evidence of the beneficial effect of exercise. The PERFORM intervention comprises an 8-week (twice a week for 6 weeks and once a week for 2 weeks) supervised rehabilitation programme of personalised exercise training and self-management education delivered by trained healthcare professionals followed by two maintenance sessions. Trial participants will be recruited over a 4.5-month period, and outcomes assessed at baseline (prerandomisation) and 3 months postrandomisation and include health-related quality of life, psychological well-being, symptom burden, frailty, exercise capacity, physical activity, sleep, cognition and serious adverse events. A mixed-methods process evaluation will assess acceptability, feasibility and fidelity of intervention delivery and feasibility of trial processes. An economic evaluation will assess the feasibility of data collection and estimate the costs of the PERFORM intervention. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The trial has been given favourable opinion by the West Midlands, Edgbaston Research Ethics Service (Ref: 23/WM/0057). Participants will be asked to give full, written consent to take part by trained researchers. Findings will be disseminated via journals, presentations and targeted communications to clinicians, commissioners, service users and patients and the public. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN68786622. PROTOCOL VERSION: 2.0 (16 May 2023).

Plasma steroid concentrations reflect acute disease severity and normalise during recovery in people hospitalised with COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE: Endocrine systems are disrupted in acute illness, and symptoms reported following coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are similar to those found with clinical hormone deficiencies. We hypothesised that people with severe acute COVID-19 and with post-COVID symptoms have glucocorticoid and sex hormone deficiencies. DESIGN/PATIENTS: Samples were obtained for analysis from two UK multicentre cohorts during hospitalisation with COVID-19 (International Severe Acute Respiratory Infection Consortium/World Health Organisation [WHO] Clinical Characterization Protocol for Severe Emerging Infections in the UK study), and at follow-up 5 months after hospitalisation (Post-hospitalisation COVID-19 study). MEASUREMENTS: Plasma steroids were quantified by liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry. Steroid concentrations were compared against disease severity (WHO ordinal scale) and validated symptom scores. Data are presented as geometric mean (SD). RESULTS: In the acute cohort (n = 239, 66.5% male), plasma cortisol concentration increased with disease severity (cortisol 753.3 [1.6] vs. 429.2 [1.7] nmol/L in fatal vs. least severe, p < .001). In males, testosterone concentrations decreased with severity (testosterone 1.2 [2.2] vs. 6.9 [1.9] nmol/L in fatal vs. least severe, p < .001). In the follow-up cohort (n = 198, 62.1% male, 68.9% ongoing symptoms, 165 [121-192] days postdischarge), plasma cortisol concentrations (275.6 [1.5] nmol/L) did not differ with in-hospital severity, perception of recovery, or patient-reported symptoms. Male testosterone concentrations (12.6 [1.5] nmol/L) were not related to in-hospital severity, perception of recovery or symptom scores. CONCLUSIONS: Circulating glucocorticoids in patients hospitalised with COVID-19 reflect acute illness, with a marked rise in cortisol and fall in male testosterone. These findings are not observed 5 months from discharge. The lack of association between hormone concentrations and common post-COVID symptoms suggests steroid insufficiency does not play a causal role in this condition.

Accelarated immune ageing is associated with COVID-19 disease severity.

BACKGROUND: The striking increase in COVID-19 severity in older adults provides a clear example of immunesenescence, the age-related remodelling of the immune system. To better characterise the association between convalescent immunesenescence and acute disease severity, we determined the immune phenotype of COVID-19 survivors and non-infected controls. RESULTS: We performed detailed immune phenotyping of peripheral blood mononuclear cells isolated from 103 COVID-19 survivors 3-5 months post recovery who were classified as having had severe (n = 56; age 53.12 ± 11.30 years), moderate (n = 32; age 52.28 ± 11.43 years) or mild (n = 15; age 49.67 ± 7.30 years) disease and compared with age and sex-matched healthy adults (n = 59; age 50.49 ± 10.68 years). We assessed a broad range of immune cell phenotypes to generate a composite score, IMM-AGE, to determine the degree of immune senescence. We found increased immunesenescence features in severe COVID-19 survivors compared to controls including: a reduced frequency and number of naïve CD4 and CD8 T cells (p < 0.0001); increased frequency of EMRA CD4 (p < 0.003) and CD8 T cells (p < 0.001); a higher frequency (p < 0.0001) and absolute numbers (p < 0.001) of CD28-ve CD57+ve senescent CD4 and CD8 T cells; higher frequency (p < 0.003) and absolute numbers (p < 0.02) of PD-1 expressing exhausted CD8 T cells; a two-fold increase in Th17 polarisation (p < 0.0001); higher frequency of memory B cells (p < 0.001) and increased frequency (p < 0.0001) and numbers (p < 0.001) of CD57+ve senescent NK cells. As a result, the IMM-AGE score was significantly higher in severe COVID-19 survivors than in controls (p < 0.001). Few differences were seen for those with moderate disease and none for mild disease. Regression analysis revealed the only pre-existing variable influencing the IMM-AGE score was South Asian ethnicity ([Formula: see text] = 0.174, p = 0.043), with a major influence being disease severity ([Formula: see text] = 0.188, p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Our analyses reveal a state of enhanced immune ageing in survivors of severe COVID-19 and suggest this could be related to SARS-Cov-2 infection. Our data support the rationale for trials of anti-immune ageing interventions for improving clinical outcomes in these patients with severe disease.

Prognostication of co-morbidity clusters on hospitalisation and mortality in advanced COPD.

RATIONALE: As the prevalence of multimorbidity increases, understanding the impact of isolated comorbidities in people COPD becomes increasingly challenging. A simplified model of common comorbidity patterns may improve outcome prediction and allow targeted therapy. OBJECTIVES: To assess whether comorbidity phenotypes derived from routinely collected clinical data in people with COPD show differences in risk of hospitalisation and mortality. METHODS: Twelve clinical measures related to common comorbidities were collected during annual reviews for people with advanced COPD and k-means cluster analysis performed. Cox proportional hazards with adjustment for covariates was used to determine hospitalisation and mortality risk between clusters. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: In 203 participants (age 66 ± 9 years, 60 % male, FEV1%predicted 31 ± 10 %) no comorbidity in isolation was predictive of worse admission or mortality risk. Four clusters were described: cluster A (cardiometabolic and anaemia), cluster B (malnourished and low mood), cluster C (obese, metabolic and mood disturbance) and cluster D (less comorbid). FEV1%predicted did not significantly differ between clusters. Mortality risk was higher in cluster A (HR 3.73 [95%CI 1.09-12.82] p = 0.036) and B (HR 3.91 [95%CI 1.17-13.14] p = 0.027) compared to cluster D. Time to admission was highest in cluster A (HR 2.01 [95%CI 1.11-3.63] p = 0.020). Cluster C was not associated with increased risk of mortality or hospitalisation. CONCLUSIONS: Despite presence of advanced COPD, we report striking differences in prognosis for both mortality and hospital admissions for different co-morbidity phenotypes. Objectively assessing the multi-system nature of COPD could lead to improved prognostication and targeted therapy for patients.

Impact of COVID-19 on immunocompromised populations during the Omicron era: insights from the observational population-based INFORM study.

Background: Immunocompromised individuals are not optimally protected by COVID-19 vaccines and potentially require additional preventive interventions to mitigate the risk of severe COVID-19. We aimed to characterise and describe the risk of severe COVID-19 across immunocompromised groups as the pandemic began to transition to an endemic phase. Methods: COVID-19-related hospitalisations, intensive care unit (ICU) admissions, and deaths (01/01/2022-31/12/2022) were compared among different groups of immunocompromised individuals vs the general population, using a retrospective cohort design and electronic health data from a random 25% sample of the English population aged ≥12 years (Registration number: ISRCTN53375662). Findings: Overall, immunocompromised individuals accounted for 3.9% of the study population, but 22% (4585/20,910) of COVID-19 hospitalisations, 28% (125/440) of COVID-19 ICU admissions, and 24% (1145/4810) of COVID-19 deaths in 2022. Restricting to those vaccinated with ≥3 doses of COVID-19 vaccine (∼84% of immunocompromised and 51% of the general population), all immunocompromised groups remained at increased risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes, with adjusted incidence rate ratios (aIRR) for hospitalisation ranging from 1.3 to 13.1. At highest risk for COVID-19 hospitalisation were individuals with: solid organ transplant (aIRR 13.1, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 11.2-15.3), moderate to severe primary immunodeficiency (aIRR 9.7, 95% CI 6.3-14.9), stem cell transplant (aIRR 11.0, 95% CI 6.8-17.6), and recent treatment for haematological malignancy (aIRR 10.6, 95% CI 9.5-11.9). Results were similar for COVID-19 ICU admissions and deaths. Interpretation: Immunocompromised individuals continue to be impacted disproportionately by COVID-19 and have an urgent need for additional preventive measures beyond current vaccination programmes. These data can help determine the immunocompromised groups for which targeted prevention strategies may have the highest impact. Funding: This study was funded by AstraZeneca UK.

Balancing the value and risk of exercise-based therapy post-COVID-19: a narrative review.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) can lead to ongoing symptoms such as breathlessness, fatigue and muscle pain, which can have a substantial impact on an individual. Exercise-based rehabilitation programmes have proven beneficial in many long-term conditions that share similar symptoms. These programmes have favourably influenced breathlessness, fatigue and pain, while also increasing functional capacity. Exercise-based rehabilitation may benefit those with ongoing symptoms following COVID-19. However, some precautions may be necessary prior to embarking on an exercise programme. Areas of concern include ongoing complex lung pathologies, such as fibrosis, cardiovascular abnormalities and fatigue, and concerns regarding post-exertional symptom exacerbation. This article addresses these concerns and proposes that an individually prescribed, symptom-titrated exercise-based intervention may be of value to individuals following infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2.

Spirometry services in England post-pandemic and the potential role of AI support software: a qualitative study of challenges and opportunities.

BACKGROUND: Spirometry services to diagnose and monitor lung disease in primary care were identified as a priority in the NHS Long Term Plan, and are restarting post-COVID-19 pandemic in England; however, evidence regarding best practice is limited. AIM: To explore perspectives on spirometry provision in primary care, and the potential for artificial intelligence (AI) decision support software to aid quality and interpretation. DESIGN AND SETTING: Semi-structured interviews with stakeholders in spirometry services across England. METHOD: Participants were recruited by snowball sampling. Interviews explored the pre- pandemic delivery of spirometry, restarting of services, and perceptions of the role of AI. Transcripts were analysed thematically. RESULTS: In total, 28 participants (mean years' clinical experience = 21.6 [standard deviation 9.4, range 3-40]) were interviewed between April and June 2022. Participants included clinicians (n = 25) and commissioners (n = 3); eight held regional and/or national respiratory network advisory roles. Four themes were identified: 1) historical challenges in provision of spirometry services; 2) inequity in post- pandemic spirometry provision and challenges to restarting spirometry in primary care; 3) future delivery closer to patients' homes by appropriately trained staff; and 4) the potential for AI to have supportive roles in spirometry. CONCLUSION: Stakeholders highlighted historic challenges and the damaging effects of the pandemic contributing to inequity in provision of spirometry, which must be addressed. Overall, stakeholders were positive about the potential of AI to support clinicians in quality assessment and interpretation of spirometry. However, it was evident that validation of the software must be sufficiently robust for clinicians and healthcare commissioners to have trust in the process.

A typology of healthcare pathways after hospital discharge for adults with COVID-19: the evolution of UK services during pandemic conditions.

Introduction: Over half of post-COVID-hospitalisation adults have persistent symptoms 2 years after discharge, providing a challenge for individuals and healthcare systems. We therefore aimed to describe a typology of UK healthcare pathways post-hospital discharge as a first step towards understanding clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of different healthcare pathways. Methods: In 2021, we surveyed hospital sites taking part in the UK Post-hospital COVID-19 (PHOSP-COVID) study. The online survey explored the availability of proactive follow-up, patient selection, involvement of multidisciplinary teams, investigations, assessment and access to mental health and rehabilitation interventions. The typology was defined by a three-stage process: 1) using the survey results to develop a bespoke algorithm to inform a draft classification, 2) a stakeholder event for refinement and 3) finalisation between the Project Advisory Group and research team. The bespoke algorithm was used to map each site onto the classification with further mapping by level of mental health and rehabilitation provision. Results: 70% of hospital sites (45 out of 64) responded to the survey. 82% (37 out of 45) reported delivering a follow-up service after hospital discharge during the first few months of the pandemic. Only 13 out of 37 services (35%) were delivered by permanent staff. The final typology of five categories included no proactive follow-up, and a matrix of four groups based on patient selection (prespecified subgroup/all patients) and complexity of assessment (low/high). The complexity of assessment, rehabilitation and mental health interventions was variable within sites. Discussion: We describe the first typology of post-hospitalisation COVID-19 healthcare pathways to enable modelling of clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness to inform future policy. Our results highlight the heterogeneity and vulnerability of healthcare services after COVID-19 hospitalisation.