Airway clearance techniques compared to no airway clearance techniques for cystic fibrosis.

BACKGROUND: Cystic fibrosis (CF) is an inherited progressive life-limiting disease characterised by the build-up of abnormally thick, sticky mucus affecting mostly the lungs, pancreas, and digestive system. Airway clearance techniques (ACTs), traditionally referred to as chest physiotherapy, are recommended as part of a complex treatment programme for people with CF. The aim of an ACTs is to enhance mucociliary clearance and remove viscous secretions from the airways within the lung to prevent distal airway obstruction. This reduces the infective burden and associated inflammatory effects on the airway epithelia.  There are a number of recognised ACTs, none of which have shown superiority in improving short-term outcomes related to mucus transport. This systematic review, which has been updated regularly since it was first published in 2000, considers the efficacy of ACTs compared to not performing any ACT in adults and children with CF. It is important to continue to review this evidence, particularly the long-term outcomes, given the recent introduction of highly effective modulator therapies and the improved health outcomes and potential changes to CF management associated with these drugs. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effectiveness and acceptability of airway clearance techniques compared to no airway clearance techniques or cough alone in people with cystic fibrosis. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group Trials Register, which comprises references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches and handsearches of relevant journals and abstract books of conference proceedings, to 17 October 2022. We searched ongoing trials registers (Clinicaltrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform) to 7 November 2022. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised or quasi-randomised studies that compared airway clearance techniques (chest physiotherapy) with no airway clearance techniques or spontaneous cough alone in people with CF. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Both review authors independently assessed study eligibility, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias of the included studies. We used GRADE methodology to assess the certainty of the evidence. MAIN RESULTS: We included 11 cross-over studies (153 participants) and one parallel study (41 participants). There were differences between studies in how the interventions were delivered, with several intervention groups combining more than one ACT. One study used autogenic drainage; five used conventional chest physiotherapy; nine used positive expiratory pressure (PEP), with one study varying the water pressure between arms; three studies used oscillating PEP; two used exercise; and two used high-frequency chest wall oscillation (HFCWO). Of the 12 included studies, 10 were single-treatment studies, and two delivered the intervention over two consecutive days (once daily in one study, twice daily in the second). This substantial heterogeneity in the treatment interventions precluded pooling of data for meta-analysis. Blinding of participants, caregivers, and clinicians is impossible in airway clearance studies; we therefore judged all studies at unclear risk of performance bias. Lack of information in eight studies made assessment of risk of bias unclear for most other domains.  We rated the certainty of evidence as low or very low due to the short-term cross-over trial design, small numbers of participants, and uncertain risk of bias across most or all domains. Six studies (84 participants) reported no effect on pulmonary function variables following intervention; but one study (14 participants) reported an improvement in pulmonary function following the intervention in some of the treatment groups. Two studies reported lung clearance index: one (41 participants) found a variable response to treatment with HFCWO, whilst another (15 participants) found no effect on lung clearance index with PEP therapy (low-certainty evidence). Five studies (55 participants) reported that ACTs, including coughing, increased radioactive tracer clearance compared to control, while a further study (eight participants) reported no improvement in radioactive tracer clearance when comparing PEP to control, although coughing was discouraged during the PEP intervention. We rated the certainty of evidence on the effect of ACTs on radioactive tracer clearance as very low. Four studies (46 participants) investigated the weight of mucus cleared from the lungs and reported greater secretions during chest physiotherapy compared to a control. One study (18 participants) reported no differences in sputum weight (very low-certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The evidence from this review shows that ACTs may have short-term effects on increasing mucus transport in people with CF. All included studies had short-term follow-up; consequently, we were unable to draw any conclusions on the long-term effects of ACTs compared to no ACTs in people with CF. The evidence in this review represents the use of airway clearance techniques in a CF population before widespread use of cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) modulators. Further research is needed to determine the effectiveness and acceptability of airway clearance in those treated with highly effective CFTR modulators.

Using a learning health system to understand the mismatch between medicines supply and actual medicines use among adults with cystic fibrosis.

BACKGROUND: Studies in separate cohorts suggest possible discrepancies between inhaled medicines supplied (median 50-60%) and medicines used (median 30-40%). We performed the first study that directly compares CF medicine supply against use to identify the cost of excess medicines supply. METHODS: This cross-sectional study included participants from 12 UK adult centres with ≥1 year of continuous adherence data from data-logging nebulisers. Medicine supply was measured as medication possession ratio (MPR) for a 1-year period from the first suitable supply date. Medicine use was measured as electronic data capture (EDC) adherence over the same period. The cost of excess medicines was calculated as whole excess box(es) supplied after accounting for the discrepancy between EDC adherence and MPR with 20% contingency. RESULTS: Among 275 participants, 133 (48.4%) were females and mean age was 30 years (95% CI 29-31 years). Median EDC adherence was 57% (IQR 23-86%), median MPR was 74% (IQR 46-96%) and the discrepancy between measures was median 14% (IQR 2-29%). Even with 20% contingency, mean potential cost of excess medicines was £1,124 (95% CI £855-1,394), ranging from £183 (95% CI £29-338) for EDC adherence ≥80% to £2,017 (95% CI £1,507-2,526) for EDC adherence <50%. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides a conservative estimate of excess inhaled medicines supply cost among adults with CF in the UK. The excess supply cost was highest among those with lowest EDC adherence, highlighting the importance of adherence support and supplying medicine according to actual use. MPR provides information about medicine supply but over-estimates actual medicine use.

Chest physiotherapy compared to no chest physiotherapy for cystic fibrosis.

BACKGROUND: Chest physiotherapy is widely used in people with cystic fibrosis in order to clear mucus from the airways. This is an updated version of previously published reviews. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effectiveness and acceptability of chest physiotherapy compared to no treatment or spontaneous cough alone to improve mucus clearance in cystic fibrosis. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group Trials Register which comprises references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches and handsearches of relevant journals and abstract books of conference proceedings.Date of the most recent search of the Group's Cystic Fibrosis Trials Register: 02 June 2015. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised or quasi-randomised clinical studies in which a form of chest physiotherapy (airway clearance technique) were taken for consideration in people with cystic fibrosis compared with either no physiotherapy treatment or spontaneous cough alone. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Both authors independently assessed study eligibility, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias in the included studies. There was heterogeneity in the published outcomes, with variable reporting which meant pooling of the data for meta-analysis was not possible. MAIN RESULTS: The searches identified 157 studies, of which eight cross-over studies (data from 96 participants) met the inclusion criteria. There were differences between studies in the way that interventions were delivered, with several of the intervention groups combining more than one treatment modality. One included study looked at autogenic drainage, six considered conventional chest physiotherapy, three considered oscillating positive expiratory pressure, seven considered positive expiratory pressure and one considered high pressure positive expiratory pressure. Of the eight studies, six were single-treatment studies and in two, the treatment intervention was performed over two consecutive days (once daily in one, twice daily in the other). This enormous heterogeneity in the treatment interventions prevented any meta-analyses from being performed. Blinding of participants, caregivers or clinicians in airway clearance studies is impossible; therefore this was not considered as a high risk of bias in the included studies. Lack of protocol data made assessment of risk of bias unclear for the majority of other criteria.Four studies, involving 28 participants, reported a higher amount of expectorated secretions during chest physiotherapy as compared to a control. One study, involving 18 participants, reported no significant differences in sputum weight. In five studies radioactive tracer clearance was used as an outcome variable. In three of these (28 participants) it was reported that chest physiotherapy, including coughing, increased radioactive tracer clearance as compared to the control period. One study (12 participants) reported increased radioactive tracer clearance associated with all interventions compared to control, although this was only reported to have reached significance for postural drainage with percussion and vibrations; and the remaining study (eight participants) reported no significant difference in radioactive tracer clearance between chest physiotherapy, without coughing, compared to the control period. Three studies, involving 42 participants reported no significant effect on pulmonary function variables following intervention; but one further study did report significant improvement in pulmonary function following the intervention in some of the treatment groups. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The results of this review show that airway clearance techniques have short-term effects in the terms of increasing mucus transport. No evidence was found on which to draw conclusions concerning the long-term effects.

Chest physiotherapy compared to no chest physiotherapy for cystic fibrosis.

BACKGROUND: Chest physiotherapy is widely used in people with cystic fibrosis in order to clear mucus from the airways. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effectiveness and acceptability of chest physiotherapy compared to no treatment or spontaneous cough alone to improve mucus clearance in cystic fibrosis. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group Trials Register which comprises references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches and handsearches of relevant journals and abstract books of conference proceedings.Date of the most recent search of the Group's Cystic Fibrosis Trials Register: 04 February 2013. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised or quasi-randomised clinical studies in which a form of chest physiotherapy (airway clearance technique) were taken for consideration in people with cystic fibrosis compared with either no physiotherapy treatment or spontaneous cough alone. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Both authors independently assessed study eligibility, extracted data and assessed study quality. There was heterogeneity in the published outcomes, with variable reporting which meant pooling of the data for meta-analysis was not possible. MAIN RESULTS: The searches identified 144 studies, of which eight cross-over studies (data from 96 participants) met the inclusion criteria. There were differences between studies in the way that interventions were delivered, with several of the intervention groups combining more than one treatment modality. One included study looked at autogenic drainage, six considered conventional chest physiotherapy, three considered oscillating positive expiratory pressure, seven considered positive expiratory pressure and one considered high pressure positive expiratory pressure. Of the eight studies, six were single-treatment studies and in two, the treatment intervention was performed over two consecutive days (once daily in one, twice daily in the other). This enormous heterogeneity in the treatment interventions prevented any meta-analyses from being performed.Four studies, involving 28 participants, reported a higher amount of expectorated secretions during chest physiotherapy as compared to a control. One study, involving 18 participants, reported no significant differences in sputum weight. In five studies radioactive tracer clearance was used as an outcome variable. In three of these (28 participants) it was reported that chest physiotherapy, including coughing, increased radioactive tracer clearance as compared to the control period. One study (12 participants) reported increased radioactive tracer clearance associated with all interventions compared to control, although this was only reported to have reached significance for postural drainage with percussion and vibrations; and the remaining study (eight participants) reported no significant difference in radioactive tracer clearance between chest physiotherapy, without coughing, compared to the control period. Three studies, involving 42 participants reported no significant effect on pulmonary function variables following intervention; but one further study did report significant improvement in pulmonary function following the intervention in some of the treatment groups. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The results of this review show that airway clearance techniques have short-term effects in the terms of increasing mucus transport. No evidence was found on which to draw conclusions concerning the long-term effects.