British Thoracic Society Quality Standard for Clinically Significant Bronchiectasis in Adults 2022.

This British Thoracic Society Quality Standard for Clinically Significant Bronchiectasis in Adults 2022 aims to encourage good practice by setting standards of high-quality respiratory care that services should follow.

Quality Standard Position Statements for Health System Policy Changes in Diagnosis and Management of COPD: A Global Perspective.

INTRODUCTION: Despite being a leading cause of death worldwide, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is underdiagnosed and underprioritized within healthcare systems. Existing healthcare policies should be revisited to include COPD prevention and management as a global priority. Here, we propose and describe health system quality standard position statements that should be implemented as a consistent standard of care for patients with COPD. METHODS: A multidisciplinary group of clinicians with expertise in COPD management together with patient advocates from eight countries participated in a quality standards review meeting convened in April 2021. The principal objective was to achieve consensus on global health system priorities to ensure consistent standards of care for COPD. These quality standard position statements were either evidence-based or reflected the combined views of the panel. RESULTS: On the basis of discussions, the experts adopted five quality standard position statements, including the rationale for their inclusion, supporting clinical evidence, and essential criteria for quality metrics. These quality standard position statements emphasize the core elements of COPD care, including (1) diagnosis, (2) adequate patient and caregiver education, (3) access to medical and nonmedical treatments aligned with the latest evidence-based recommendations and appropriate management by a respiratory specialist when required, (4) appropriate management of acute COPD exacerbations, and (5) regular patient and caregiver follow-up for care plan reviews. CONCLUSIONS: These practical quality standards may be applicable to and implemented at both local and national levels. While universally applicable to the core elements of appropriate COPD care, they can be adapted to consider differences in healthcare resources and priorities, organizational structure, and care delivery capabilities of individual healthcare systems. We encourage the adoption of these global quality standards by policymakers and healthcare practitioners alike to inform national and regional health system policy revisions to improve the quality and consistency of COPD care worldwide.

A Patient Charter for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) has a profound impact on people living with the disease and has a high global economic and social burden. Often, people with COPD are undiagnosed, while those diagnosed are undertreated and undereducated on different aspects of COPD care. Although there are many published evidence-based treatment guidelines from different expert groups and societies, they are frequently not adhered to, which results in significant gaps in care. In particular, 'flare-ups' (known as exacerbations of COPD), which accelerate disease progression, are often under-reported, despite guidelines recommending an escalation of maintenance treatment to prevent subsequent flare-ups. Management of COPD should be proactive to prevent worsening of symptoms and to reduce the risk of future flare-ups and premature death, rather than a secondary reaction to a worsening health status. Key to this is patient access to accurate diagnosis, effective treatment and specialist care, which can vary widely due to socioeconomic differences, geographical locations and poor guideline implementation. In addition, the stigma associated with COPD can act as a barrier, which can result in people being reluctant to access treatment or clinicians being nihilistic. As global patient advocates, we have co-developed this patient charter to set a standard of care that people living with COPD should expect, raising awareness and understanding of the causes and consequences of COPD as well as the potential to improve patient care. Patients with COPD should be empowered to live the highest quality of life possible with the least number of flare-ups. We set out six principles in line with current COPD guideline recommendations, that should be implemented by governments, healthcare providers, policymakers, lung health industry partners and patients/caregivers to drive meaningful change in COPD care.

The Burden of Self-Reported Rhinitis and Associated Risk for Exacerbations with Moderate-Severe Asthma in Primary Care Patients.

PURPOSE: There is a dearth of research regarding the prevalence and nature of patient-reported rhinitis and its relationship with risk of asthma exacerbations. The aim of this study was to (i) determine the prevalence, severity and treatment of self-reported rhinitis symptoms among adults aged ≥18 years with asthma treated at Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) Step 3 and above and (ii) compare the demographics, clinical characteristics, medication use, side-effects and healthcare practitioner review between patients who report rhinitis symptoms and those who do not and (iii) determine whether patient-reported rhinitis is associated with risk of asthma exacerbations in the total patient sample. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This analysis used data from the iHARP (Initiative Helping Asthma in Real-life Patients) asthma review service - a cross-sectional observational study (2011 and 2014) in seven countries that captured data on patient demographics, rhinitis symptoms, asthma symptoms, indicators of exacerbations, medication use, oropharyngeal effects and side-effects, using practitioner- and patient-reported questionnaires. Comparisons between patients with and without rhinitis were tested. Univariate logistic regression was used to identify variables associated with risk of exacerbations for entry into multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: This report contains data from 4274 patients: 67.4% (2881/4274) reported rhinitis symptoms and of which 65.7% (1894/2881) had not received a doctor diagnosis; 36.5% (1052/2881) had moderate-severe rhinitis, 12.4% (358/2881) had used intranasal corticosteroids and 19.8% (569/2881) oral antihistamines. Patients with coexisting moderate-severe rhinitis were more likely to have GINA-defined uncontrolled asthma than those with mild rhinitis or no rhinitis. Moderate-severe rhinitis was associated with 40% increased risk of asthma exacerbations (OR=1.40, 95% CI: 1.02-1.90). CONCLUSION: This study identified a major gap in the diagnosis and management of rhinitis in a cohort of people with asthma treated at GINA Step 3 and above who are managed in general practice. It highlights the need for practitioners to identify, evaluate and optimally treat rhinitis in adults with asthma, which is a significant factor associated with exacerbation risk.

Efficacy and Safety of LAMA/LABA Fixed-Dose Combination Therapies in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Systematic Review of Direct and Indirect Treatment Comparisons.

Background: This literature review assessed comparative efficacy and safety of long-acting muscarinic antagonist/long-acting ß2-agonist (LAMA/LABA) fixed-dose combinations (FDCs) in patients with COPD and moderate-to-very severe airflow limitation, using evidence from direct (head-to-head) and indirect treatment comparisons. Methods: Two systematic literature reviews were conducted to identify direct comparisons (head-to-head randomized controlled trials [RCTs]) and indirect comparisons (network meta-analyses [NMAs]; indirect treatment comparisons; meta-analyses) in patients with COPD with moderate-to-very severe airflow limitation. Study/Analysis characteristics, eligibility criteria, patient characteristics, and overall conclusions were extracted from relevant publications. The review of indirect comparisons focused on NMAs reporting efficacy outcomes at 12 and 24 weeks of treatment (established durations of symptomatic studies in COPD recommended by regulators). Results: Direct comparisons: Four RCTs that provided head-to-head comparisons of LAMA/LABA FDCs were identified, and these varied in their study design, included patient population and reported endpoints. While some differences in lung function outcomes were noted, where assessed, LAMA/LABA FDCs had comparable efficacy in improving symptoms, health status, exacerbations, and comparable safety profiles. However, the differences in study methodology and patient characteristics between these studies made it difficult to draw generalizable conclusions regarding the comparative effectiveness of LAMA/LABA FDCs from the direct comparisons alone. Indirect comparisons: Six NMAs were identified that reported indirect comparisons between LAMA/LABA FDCs; five of these were within the pre-defined scope of this review. Although the scope of each NMA varied, all five concluded that LAMA/LABA FDCs were generally comparable in terms of lung function improvements, patient-reported outcomes, and safety (where assessed). Conclusion: Although there were some inconsistencies between the outcomes of RCTs and NMAs for lung function, the totality of lung function, symptoms, exacerbations, and safety data suggests that currently available LAMA/LABA FDCs have comparable efficacy and safety in patients with COPD and moderate-to-very severe airflow limitation.

Working for Better Asthma Control: How Can We Improve the Dialogue Between Patients and Healthcare Professionals?

Asthma is a chronic disease affecting more than 300 million people globally. Poor asthma control that leads to unnecessary symptoms is estimated to affect nearly half of people with asthma. A critical way to address poor control is for healthcare professionals (HCPs) and patients to enter a shared dialogue on treatment and asthma management. This article explores the views of both patient and HCP to better understand how to achieve asthma control. From the patient's perspective, being a person with asthma has ramifications to one's sense of identity, and thus one's ability and willingness to actively manage their asthma. Furthermore, lack of education and concerns about the effectiveness of treatment can also ultimately lead to poor control, a term that can be understood differently by patients and HCPs. One goal is to help to normalise life for people with asthma. For this, HCPs need to align on what this means for each individual and then work together to produce a plan that can be applied to the patient's daily life. Training for HCPs on good communication skills and empowering patients to be involved in their asthma management are both critical to ensure effective shared decision-making and, ultimately, improved quality of life for people with asthma. FUNDING: Boehringer Ingelheim. Plain language summary available for this article.

A multinational observational study identifying primary care patients at risk of overestimation of asthma control.

Factors related to the discrepancy between patient-perceived and actual disease control remain unclear. Identifying patients at risk of overestimation of asthma control remains elusive. This study aimed to (i) investigate the relationship between patient-reported and actual level of asthma control (ii), compare the characteristics between patients who believe their asthma is well controlled that accurately report 'well-controlled' asthma with those that do not, and (iii) identify factors associated with inaccurately reported 'well-controlled' asthma. A historical, multinational, cross-sectional study using data from the iHARP (initiative Helping Asthma in Real-life Patients) review service for adults with asthma prescribed fixed-dose combination therapy. Data from 4274 patients were analysed. A major discrepancy between patient-reported and Global Initiative for Asthma defined asthma control was detected; 71.1% of patients who reported 'well-controlled' asthma were inaccurate in their perception despite receiving regular maintenance therapy. Significant differences were noted in age, gender, body mass index, education level, medication use, side effects, attitudes to preventer inhaler use, inhaler technique review and respiratory specialist review between patients who accurately reported 'well-controlled' asthma and those who did not. Independent risk factors associated with inaccurately reported 'well-controlled' asthma were: having taken a maximum of 5-12 puffs or more of reliever inhaler on at least one day within the previous 4 weeks; being female; having seen a respiratory specialist more than a year ago (rather than in the previous year); and having required oral corticosteroids for worsening asthma in the previous year. The study highlighted the significant hidden burden associated with under-recognition of poor asthma control, on the part of the patient and the need for targeted interventions designed to address the continuing discrepancy between perceived and actual disease control.

Asthma impacts on workplace productivity in employed patients who are symptomatic despite background therapy: a multinational survey.

Background: Asthma affects millions of people worldwide, with many patients experiencing symptoms that affect their daily lives despite receiving long-term controller medication. Purpose: Work is a large part of most people's lives, hence this study investigated the impact of uncontrolled asthma on work productivity in adults receiving asthma maintenance therapy. Patients and methods: An online survey was completed by employed adults in Brazil, Canada, Germany, Japan, Spain and the UK. Participants were confirmed as symptomatic using questions from the Royal College of Physicians' 3 Questions for Asthma tool. The survey contained the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment - Specific Health Problem questionnaire and an open-ended question on the effect of asthma at work. Results: Of the 2,055 patients on long-term maintenance therapy screened, 1,598 were symptomatic and completed the survey. The average percentage of work hours missed in a single week due to asthma symptoms was 9.3%, ranging from 3.5% (UK) to 17.4% (Brazil). Nearly three-quarters of patients reported an impact on their productivity at work caused by asthma. Overall work productivity loss (both time off and productivity whilst at work) due to asthma was 36%, ranging from 21% (UK) to 59% (Brazil). When asked how asthma made participants feel at work, many respondents highlighted how their respiratory symptoms affect them. Tiredness, weakness and mental strain were also identified as particular challenges, with respondents describing concerns about the perception of colleagues and feelings of inferiority. Conclusions: This study emphasizes the extent to which work time is adversely affected by asthma in patients despite the use of long-term maintenance medication, and provides unique personal insights. Strategies to improve patients' lives may include asthma education, optimizing asthma management plans and running workplace well-being programs. Clinicians, employers and occupational health teams should be more aware of the impact of asthma symptoms on employees, and work together to help overcome these challenges.

Primary care implications of the British Thoracic Society Guidelines for bronchiectasis in adults 2019.

The British Thoracic Society (BTS) Guidelines for Bronchiectasis in adults were published in January 2019, and comprise recommendations for treatment from primary to tertiary care. Here, we outline the practical implications of these guidelines for primary care practitioners. A diagnosis of bronchiectasis should be considered when a patient presents with a recurrent or persistent (>8 weeks) productive cough. A definitive diagnosis is made by using thin-section chest computed tomography (CT). Once diagnosed, patients should be initially assessed by a specialist respiratory team and a shared management plan formulated with the patient, the specialist and primary care teams. The cornerstone of primary care management is physiotherapy to improve airway sputum clearance and maximise exercise capacity, with prompt treatment of acute exacerbations with antibiotics.

Unmet needs in asthma.

Despite advances in the diagnosis and management of asthma, uncontrolled disease is still associated with a substantial mortality and morbidity burden. Patients often overestimate their level of asthma control while also reporting that asthma symptoms affect their quality of life and ability to work or study. There is some evidence of success with primary prevention measures in high-risk children and the secondary prevention of asthma in sensitized individuals or those at risk of developing occupational asthma. There are challenges with diagnosis - with under- and overdiagnosis and misdiagnosis being common - and in the treatment of asthma, despite clear treatment guidelines. In particular, severe asthma presents a huge challenge to the clinician, and its complex and heterogeneous nature warrants a personalized medicine approach to match therapies to individual patients. However, the tools for this are currently lacking in primary care. This article reviews the current unmet need in the diagnosis and clinical management of asthma, and provides an overview of the limitations of current therapies.

Fractional exhaled nitric oxide as a predictor of response to inhaled corticosteroids in patients with non-specific respiratory symptoms and insignificant bronchodilator reversibility: a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Chronic non-specific respiratory symptoms are difficult to manage. This trial aimed to evaluate the association between baseline fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) and the response to inhaled corticosteroids in patients with non-specific respiratory symptoms. METHODS: In this double-blind randomised placebo-controlled trial, we enrolled undiagnosed patients, aged 18-80 years, with cough, wheeze, or dyspnoea and less than 20% bronchodilator reversibility across 26 primary care centres and hospitals in the UK and Singapore. Patients were assessed for 2 weeks before being randomly assigned (1:1) to 4 weeks of treatment with extrafine inhaled corticosteroids (QVAR 80 µg, two puffs twice per day, equivalent to 800 µg per day beclomethasone dipropionate) or placebo. Randomisation was stratified by baseline FeNO measurement: normal (≤25 parts per billion [ppb]), intermediate (>25 tp <40 ppb), and high (≥40 ppb). The primary endpoint was change in Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ7) mean score. We used generalised linear modelling to assess FeNO as a predictor of response, estimating an interaction effect between FeNO and treatment on change in ACQ7. We did our primary and secondary analyses in the per-protocol set, which excluded patients with non-completion of the primary endpoint, non-compliance to treatment (ascertained by patient report), and study visits made outside the predefined visit windows. This study is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02294279. FINDINGS: Between Feb 4, 2015, and July 12, 2016, we randomly assigned 294 patients to extrafine inhaled corticosteroid treatment (n=148) or placebo (n=146). Following exclusions due to protocol violations, we analysed 214 patients (114 extrafine inhaled corticosteroids and 100 placebo). We observed a significant interaction between baseline FeNO and treatment group for every 10 ppb increase in baseline FeNO, with the change in ACQ7 greater in the extrafine inhaled corticosteroids group than in the placebo group (difference between groups 0·071, 95% CI 0·002 to 0·139; p=0·044). The most common adverse events were nasopharyngitis (18 [12%] patients in the treatment group vs 13 [9%] in the placebo group), infections and infestations (25 [17%] vs 21 [14%]), and respiratory, thoracic, and mediastinal disorders (13 [9%] vs 17 [12%]). INTERPRETATION: FeNO measurement is an easy and non-invasive tool to use in clinical practice in patients with non-specific respiratory symptoms to predict response to inhaled corticosteroids. Further research is needed to examine its role in patients with evidence of other airway diseases, such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. FUNDING: Sponsored by OPRI with partial funding by Circassia and study drugs provided by TEVA.

British Thoracic Society guideline for bronchiectasis in adults.

The full British Thoracic Society Guideline for Bronchiectasis in Adults is published in Thorax. The following is a summary of the recommendations and good practice points. The sections referred to in the summary refer to the full guideline. The appendices are available in the full guideline.

Initiating or changing to a fixed-dose combination of Fluticasone propionate/Formoterol over Fluticasone propionate/Salmeterol: A real-life effectiveness and cost impact evaluation.

OBJECTIVE: Asthma has a substantial impact on quality of life and health care resources. The identification of a more cost-effective, yet equally efficacious, treatment could positively influence the economic burden of this disease. Fluticasone propionate/Formoterol (FP/FOR) may be as effective as Fluticasone Salmeterol (FP/SAL). We evaluated non-inferiority of asthma control in terms of the proportion of patients free from exacerbations, and conducted a cost impact analysis. METHODS: This historical, matched cohort database study evaluated two treatment groups in the Optimum Patient Care Research Database in the UK: 1) an FP/FOR cohort of patients initiating treatment with FP/FOR or changing from FP/SAL to FP/FOR and; 2) an FP/SAL cohort comprising patients initiating, or remaining on FP/SAL pMDI combination therapy. The main outcome evaluated non-inferiority of effectiveness (defined as prevention of severe exacerbations, lower limit of the 95% confidence interval (CI) of the mean difference between groups in patient proportions with no exacerbations is -3.5% or higher) in patients treated with FP/FOR versus FP/SAL. RESULTS: After matching 1:3, we studied a total of 2472 patients: 618 in the FP/FOR cohort (174 patients initiated on FP/FOR and 444 patients changed to FP/FOR) and 1854 in the FP/SAL cohort (522 patients initiated FP/SAL and 1332 continued FP/SAL). The percentage of patients prescribed FP/FOR met non-inferiority as the adjusted mean difference in proportion of no severe exacerbations (95%CI) was 0.008 (-0.032, 0.047) between the two cohorts. No other significant differences were observed except acute respiratory event rates, which were lower for patients prescribed FP/FOR (rate ratio [RR] 0.82, 95% CI 0.71, 0.94). CONCLUSIONS: Changing to, or initiating FP/FOR combination therapy, is associated with a non-inferior proportion of patients who are severe exacerbation-free at a lower average annual cost compared with continuing or initiating treatment with FP/SAL.

Erratum: Changes in initial COPD treatment choice over time and factors influencing prescribing decisions in UK primary care: a real-world study.

This corrects the article DOI: 10.1038/npjpcrm.2016.2.

Inhaler Errors in the CRITIKAL Study: Type, Frequency, and Association with Asthma Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Poor inhaler technique has been linked to poor asthma outcomes. Training can reduce the number of inhaler errors, but it is unknown which errors have the greatest impact on asthma outcomes. OBJECTIVE: The CRITical Inhaler mistaKes and Asthma controL study investigated the association between specific inhaler errors and asthma outcomes. METHODS: This analysis used data from the iHARP asthma review service-a multicenter cross-sectional study of adults with asthma. The review took place between 2011 and 2014 and captured data from more than 5000 patients on demographic characteristics, asthma symptoms, and inhaler errors observed by purposefully trained health care professionals. People with asthma receiving a fixed-dose combination treatment with inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting beta agonist were categorized by the controller inhaler device they used-dry-powder inhalers or metered-dose inhalers: inhaler errors were analyzed within device cohorts. Error frequency, asthma symptom control, and exacerbation rate were analyzed to identify critical errors. RESULTS: This report contains data from 3660 patients. Insufficient inspiratory effort was common (made by 32%-38% of dry-powder inhaler users) and was associated with uncontrolled asthma (adjusted odds ratios [95% CI], 1.30 [1.08-1.57] and 1.56 [1.17-2.07] in those using Turbohaler and Diskus devices, respectively) and increased exacerbation rate. In metered-dose inhaler users, actuation before inhalation (24.9% of patients) was associated with uncontrolled asthma (1.55 [1.11-2.16]). Several more generic and device-specific errors were also identified as critical. CONCLUSIONS: Specific inhaler errors have been identified as critical errors, evidenced by frequency and association with asthma outcomes. Asthma management should target inhaler training to reduce key critical errors.

Managing multimorbidity in primary care in patients with chronic respiratory conditions.

The term multimorbidity is usually defined as the coexistence of two or more chronic conditions within an individual, whereas the term comorbidity traditionally describes patients with an index condition and one or more additional conditions. Multimorbidity of chronic conditions markedly worsens outcomes in patients, increases treatment burden and increases health service costs. Although patients with chronic respiratory disease often have physical comorbidities, they also commonly experience psychological problems such as depression and anxiety. Multimorbidity is associated with increased health-care utilisation and specifically with an increased number of prescription drugs in individuals with multiple chronic conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. This npj Primary Care Respiratory Medicine Education Section case study involves a patient in a primary care consultation presenting several common diseases prevalent in people of this age. The patient takes nine different drugs at this moment, one or more pills for each condition, which amounts to polypharmacy. The problems related with polypharmacy recommend that a routine medication review by primary care physicians be performed to reduce the risk of adverse effects of polypharmacy among those with multiple chronic conditions. The primary care physician has the challenging role of integrating all of the clinical problems affecting the patient and reviewing all medicaments (including over-the-counter medications) taken by the patient at any point in time, and has the has the key to prevent the unwanted consequences of polypharmacy. Multimorbid chronic disease management can be achieved with the use of care planning, unified disease templates, use of information technology with appointment reminders and with the help of the wider primary care and community teams.

Characteristics of patients making serious inhaler errors with a dry powder inhaler and association with asthma-related events in a primary care setting.

OBJECTIVE: Correct inhaler technique is central to effective delivery of asthma therapy. The study aim was to identify factors associated with serious inhaler technique errors and their prevalence among primary care patients with asthma using the Diskus dry powder inhaler (DPI). METHODS: This was a historical, multinational, cross-sectional study (2011-2013) using the iHARP database, an international initiative that includes patient- and healthcare provider-reported questionnaires from eight countries. Patients with asthma were observed for serious inhaler errors by trained healthcare providers as predefined by the iHARP steering committee. Multivariable logistic regression, stepwise reduced, was used to identify clinical characteristics and asthma-related outcomes associated with ≥1 serious errors. RESULTS: Of 3681 patients with asthma, 623 (17%) were using a Diskus (mean [SD] age, 51 [14]; 61% women). A total of 341 (55%) patients made ≥1 serious errors. The most common errors were the failure to exhale before inhalation, insufficient breath-hold at the end of inhalation, and inhalation that was not forceful from the start. Factors significantly associated with ≥1 serious errors included asthma-related hospitalization the previous year (odds ratio [OR] 2.07; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.26-3.40); obesity (OR 1.75; 1.17-2.63); poor asthma control the previous 4 weeks (OR 1.57; 1.04-2.36); female sex (OR 1.51; 1.08-2.10); and no inhaler technique review during the previous year (OR 1.45; 1.04-2.02). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with evidence of poor asthma control should be targeted for a review of their inhaler technique even when using a device thought to have a low error rate.