-
Frontiers in Rehabilitation Sciences 2022Chronic cough is a common reason for medical referral and its prevalence is on the rise. With only one pharmaceutical therapy currently under review for the treatment of...
BACKGROUND
Chronic cough is a common reason for medical referral and its prevalence is on the rise. With only one pharmaceutical therapy currently under review for the treatment of refractory chronic cough, exploring non-pharmacological chronic cough management therapies is important. This systematic review summarizes the effectiveness of non-pharmacological chronic cough therapies in adults with non-productive refractory chronic cough or cough due to chronic respiratory diseases.
METHODS
We searched Medline, Embase, Cochrane, CINAHL, and Scopus from inception to September 2021. Randomized controlled trials published in English, Portuguese, or French, and examining the effects of non-pharmacological therapies in adults with chronic non-productive cough (>8 weeks; <2 teaspoons sputum) were included. Mean differences, medians, and odds ratios were calculated as appropriate.
RESULTS
16,546 articles were identified and six articles representing five unique studies were included. Studies evaluated 228 individuals with refractory chronic cough or chronic cough due to a chronic respiratory disease [162 women (71%); 52 ± 11 to 61 ± 8 years old]. Obstructive sleep apnea was the only chronic respiratory disease studied. Non-pharmacological therapies included education, cough suppression, breathing techniques, mindfulness, and continuous positive airway pressure. When standing alone, non-pharmacological cough therapies improved cough-specific health related quality of life when not associated with interventions (mean diff MD 1.53 to 4.54), cough frequency (MD 0.59 95%CI 0.36 to 0.95), and voice outcomes (MD 0.3 to 1) when compared to control interventions.
CONCLUSION
The evidence of non-pharmacological therapies for non-productive chronic cough is limited. Existing studies reflect the heterogeneity in study design, sample size, and outcome measures. Thus, clinical recommendations for using the most effective interventions remain to be confirmed.
PubMed: 36188925
DOI: 10.3389/fresc.2022.905257 -
SAGE Open Medicine 2021Occupational respiratory symptoms are manifestations of respiratory diseases because of exposure to dust or chemicals such as asbestos, silicon and aluminium in the... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Occupational respiratory symptoms are manifestations of respiratory diseases because of exposure to dust or chemicals such as asbestos, silicon and aluminium in the workplace like cement factory, tannery, textile and/or street sweeping, all of which affect the health condition and productivity. In Ethiopia, several primary studies were conducted regarding the magnitude of occupational respiratory symptoms with the prevalence of 68.89% in street sweepers and associated factors with inconsistent results. This meta-analysis aimed to pool the prevalence of respiratory symptoms and their associated factors among Ethiopian adults working in different workplaces.
METHODS
PubMed, African Journals Online, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library and Direct Google were systematically searched to identify primary studies. Two authors performed data abstraction and quality assessment for each included study independently. Cochran's Q-statistic and I (I-squared) statistic were used to check heterogeneity. DerSimonian and Laird random-effects models were used to estimate the pooled prevalence and associated factors of respiratory symptoms. Publication bias was checked by funnel plot and Egger's test, and also sensitivity analyses were performed.
RESULTS
Ten primary studies with 3441 study participants were included for the narrative synthesis and meta-analysis of the pooled prevalence of occupational respiratory symptoms. The pooled prevalence of overall occupational respiratory symptom was 54.58% (95% CI: 45.37-63.79). Dry cough was the most encountered respiratory symptom [34.93, 95% CI: 29.52-40.35], followed by breathlessness [28.67%, 95% CI: 20.13-37.22]. Work experience of over 5 years [OR = 2.24, 95% CI: 1.21-4.16] and educational level of Grade 8 and lower [OR = 1.28, 95% CI: 1.06-1.55] were significantly associated with occupational respiratory symptoms.
CONCLUSION
In this review, the pooled prevalence of occupational respiratory symptoms was high. The findings of this study dictate the need for the implementation of workplace safety measures. Special attention is required to employees with lower educational level and longer duration of work experience.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION
CRD42020176826.
PubMed: 34094559
DOI: 10.1177/20503121211018121 -
Diabetes & Metabolic Syndrome 2021/Aim: Various reports of the occurrence of type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) in patients with COVID-19 have been published, denoting an association between both diseases....
BACKGROUND
/Aim: Various reports of the occurrence of type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) in patients with COVID-19 have been published, denoting an association between both diseases. Therefore, we conducted this systematic review to summarize the prevalence of T1DM in COVID-19 patients and to identify the clinical presentations and outcomes in this patient population.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Up to 10/27/2020, Medline, Embase, cochrane and google scholar databases were searched for original studies investigating the association between COVID-19 and T1DM. A manual search was conducted to identify missing studies. The quality of included studies was analyzed by the National Institute of Health (NIH) risk of bias tool. Outcomes included length of hospital stay, hospitalization, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA), severe hypoglycemia, and death.
RESULTS
Fifteen studies were included in the qualitative analysis. Included studies reported data of both adult and pediatric patients. The prevalence of T1DM in COVID-19 patients ranged from 0.15% to 28.98%, while the rate of COVID-19 in patients with T1DM ranged from 0% to 16.67%. Dry cough, nausea, vomiting, fever and elevated blood glucose levels were the most commonly reported presentations. The investigated outcomes varied widely among studied populations.
CONCLUSIONS
The prevalence of T1DM in patients with COVID-19 ranged from 0.15% to 28.98%. The most common presentation of COVID-19 in patients with T1DM included fever, dry cough, nausea and vomiting, elevated blood glucose and diabetic ketoacidosis. The outcomes of COVID-19 in terms of length of hospital stay, hospitalization, ICU admission, DKA rate, and severe hypoglycemia were reported variably in included studies. Due to the heterogeneous study populations and the presence of many limitations, more studies are still warranted to reach a definitive conclusion.
Topics: Blood Glucose; COVID-19; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1; Humans; Length of Stay
PubMed: 33592371
DOI: 10.1016/j.dsx.2021.02.009 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2020Several agents are used to clear secretions from the airways of people with cystic fibrosis. Mannitol increases mucociliary clearance, but its exact mechanism of action... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Several agents are used to clear secretions from the airways of people with cystic fibrosis. Mannitol increases mucociliary clearance, but its exact mechanism of action is unknown. The dry powder formulation of mannitol may be more convenient and easier to use compared with established agents which require delivery via a nebuliser. Phase III trials of inhaled dry powder mannitol for the treatment of cystic fibrosis have been completed and it is now available in Australia and some countries in Europe. This is an update of a previous review.
OBJECTIVES
To assess whether inhaled dry powder mannitol is well tolerated, whether it improves the quality of life and respiratory function in people with cystic fibrosis and which adverse events are associated with the treatment.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group Trials Register which comprises references identified from comprehensive electronic databases, handsearching relevant journals and abstracts from conferences. Date of last search: 12 December 2019.
SELECTION CRITERIA
All randomised controlled studies comparing mannitol with placebo, active inhaled comparators (for example, hypertonic saline or dornase alfa) or with no treatment.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Authors independently assessed studies for inclusion, carried out data extraction and assessed the risk of bias in included studies. The quality of the evidence was assessed using GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
Six studies (reported in 36 unique publications) were included with a total of 784 participants. Duration of treatment in the included studies ranged from 12 days to six months, with open-label treatment for an additional six months in two of the studies. Five studies compared mannitol with control (a very low dose of mannitol or non-respirable mannitol) and the final study compared mannitol to dornase alfa alone and to mannitol plus dornase alfa. Two large studies had a similar parallel design and provided data for 600 participants, which could be pooled where data for a particular outcome and time point were available. The remaining studies had much smaller sample sizes (ranging from 22 to 95) and data could not be pooled due to differences in design, interventions and population. Pooled evidence from the two large parallel studies was judged to be of low to moderate quality and from the smaller studies was judged to be of low to very low quality. In all studies, there was an initial test to see if participants tolerated mannitol, with only those who could tolerate the drug being randomised; therefore, the study results are not applicable to the cystic fibrosis population as a whole. While the published papers did not provide all the data required for our analysis, additional unpublished data were provided by the drug's manufacturer and the author of one of the studies. Pooling the large parallel studies comparing mannitol to control, up to and including six months, lung function (forced expiratory volume at one second) measured in both mL and % predicted was significantly improved in the mannitol group compared to the control group (moderate-quality evidence). Beneficial results were observed in these studies in adults and in both concomitant dornase alfa users and non-users in these studies. In the smaller studies, statistically significant improvements in lung function were also observed in the mannitol groups compared to the non-respirable mannitol groups; however, we judged this evidence to be of low to very low quality. For the comparisons of mannitol and control, we found no consistent differences in health-related quality of life in any of the domains except for burden of treatment, which was less for mannitol up to four months in the two pooled studies of a similar design; this difference was not maintained at six months. It should be noted that the tool used to measure health-related quality of life was not designed to assess mucolytics and pooling of the age-appropriate tools (as done in some of the included studies) may not be valid so results were judged to be low to very low quality and should be interpreted with caution. Cough, haemoptysis, bronchospasm, pharyngolaryngeal pain and post-tussive vomiting were the most commonly reported side effects in both treatment groups. Where rates of adverse events could be compared, statistically no significant differences were found between mannitol and control groups; although some of these events may have clinical relevance for people with CF. For the comparisons of mannitol to dornase alfa alone and to mannitol plus dornase alfa, very low-quality evidence from a 12-week cross-over study of 28 participants showed no statistically significant differences in the recorded domains of health-related quality of life or measures of lung function. Cough was the most common side effect in the mannitol alone arm but there was no occurrence of cough in the dornase alfa alone arm and the most commonly reported reason of withdrawal from the mannitol plus dornase alfa arm was pulmonary exacerbations. In terms of secondary outcomes of the review (pulmonary exacerbations, hospitalisations, symptoms, sputum microbiology), evidence provided by the included studies was more limited. For all comparisons, no consistent statistically significant and clinically meaningful differences were observed between mannitol and control treatments (including dornase alfa).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is moderate-quality evidence to show that treatment with mannitol over a six-month period is associated with an improvement in some measures of lung function in people with cystic fibrosis compared to control. There is low to very low-quality evidence suggesting no difference in quality of life for participants taking mannitol compared to control. This review provides very low-quality evidence suggesting no difference in lung function or quality of life comparing mannitol to dornase alfa alone and to mannitol plus dornase alfa. The clinical implications from this review suggest that mannitol could be considered as a treatment in cystic fibrosis; but further research is required in order to establish who may benefit most and whether this benefit is sustained in the longer term. Furthermore, studies comparing its efficacy against other (established) mucolytic therapies need to be undertaken before it can be considered for mainstream practice.
Topics: Administration, Inhalation; Adult; Child; Cystic Fibrosis; Deoxyribonuclease I; Forced Expiratory Volume; Humans; Mannitol; Mucociliary Clearance; Powders; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Recombinant Proteins; Respiratory Function Tests; Vital Capacity
PubMed: 32358807
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008649.pub4 -
Immunotherapy Oct 2021We aimed to quantify the effects of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) on the prognosis of COVID-19. A meta-analysis was conducted and the hospitalization, severe... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
We aimed to quantify the effects of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) on the prognosis of COVID-19. A meta-analysis was conducted and the hospitalization, severe disease and mortality rates were assessed. Thirteen studies comprising of 4614 cancer patients with COVID-19 were included. When compared with cancer patients without prior ICI exposure, patients with prior ICI treatment exhibited a higher rate of hospitalization (odds ratio [OR] 2.0, 95% CI 1.19-3.38, p = 0.01). However, the OR of severe disease and mortality in ICI exposed cases was similar to non-ICI exposed patients (OR 1.55, 95% CI 0.69-3.51, p = 0.29; OR 1.12, 95% CI 0.85-1.48, p = 0.42, respectively). It is uncertain whether prior exposure to ICIs increases the risk of severe disease and death, however the observed OR suggest a higher rate of hospitalization.
Topics: COVID-19; Humans; Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors; Prognosis; SARS-CoV-2
PubMed: 34431319
DOI: 10.2217/imt-2021-0007 -
Journal of Clinical Medicine May 2020The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused a worldwide outbreak of respiratory illness. This review aims to evaluate the effectiveness and adverse... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused a worldwide outbreak of respiratory illness. This review aims to evaluate the effectiveness and adverse events of herbal medicines for the treatment of COVID-19.
METHODS
Twelve databases were searched through 12 May 2020. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs assessing the effects of herbal medicines for the treatment of COVID-19 were eligible. The study selection and data extraction were performed by two independent reviewers. The Cochrane risk of bias tool was used for the assessment of the risk of bias in all included RCTs. Mean differences (MDs), risk ratios (RRs) and odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated, and the effect sizes of the studies were pooled.
RESULTS
Seven RCTs with a total of 855 patients were included. All included trials compared the combined therapy of herbal medicine with Western medicine to Western medicine alone. The combined therapy significantly improved the total effective rate (RR 1.23, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.34, < 0.001), cough symptom disappearance rate (RR 1.45, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.89, = 0.005), and sputum production symptom disappearance rate (RR 1.73, 95% CI 1.19 to 2.50, = 0.004). Beneficial effects of the combined therapy were also seen in TCM syndrome score of cough (MD -1.18, 95% CI -1.34 to -1.03, < 0.001), fever (MD -0.62, 95% CI -0.79 to -0.45, < 0.001), dry and sore throat (MD -0.83, 95% CI -1.45 to -0.20, = 0.009), and fatigue (MD -0.60, 95% CI -1.04 to -0.17, = 0.007). The overall risk of bias of the included studies was unclear. No serious adverse events were reported.
CONCLUSION
Significant effects of the combined therapy of herbal medicine with Western medicine were found, and revealed the potential role of herbal medicine in treating COVID-19. More high-quality RCTs are needed to further validate the effectiveness and adverse events of herbal medicine in the treatment of COVID-19.
PubMed: 32456123
DOI: 10.3390/jcm9051583 -
International Journal of Environmental... Dec 2022People spend a considerable portion of their lives indoors; thus, the quality of the indoor environment is crucial. Semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs) are among the... (Review)
Review
People spend a considerable portion of their lives indoors; thus, the quality of the indoor environment is crucial. Semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs) are among the primary indoor pollutants responsible for various health risks. This paper systematically reviews the impact of SVOC exposure on human health in Chinese built environments. Based on a set of criteria, we judged 12 publications as providing sufficient information on both SVOC exposure and health effects to inform the relationship. Out of six studies on polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), three observed a positive association between PAH exposure and lung cancer. Out of six studies of phthalate exposure, two studies reported a significant positive association between DEP and DiBP and asthma, between DEP and DEHP and dry cough among children, and between DBP and rhinitis among younger adults. The results of this review suggest that there might be a link between phthalate exposure and asthma and allergies, as well as a link between PAH exposure and lung cancer. However, due to the limited number of studies conducted, more evidence is necessary to definitively guide the establishment of standards for SVOC control in China.
Topics: Adult; Child; Humans; Air Pollutants; Air Pollution, Indoor; Asthma; Environmental Exposure; Lung Neoplasms; Phthalic Acids; Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons; Volatile Organic Compounds; China
PubMed: 36613006
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph20010678 -
BMJ Open Respiratory Research Jun 2023Emerging evidence in both developed and developing countries indicate that occupational health hazards and diseases among construction workers constitute a significant...
BACKGROUND
Emerging evidence in both developed and developing countries indicate that occupational health hazards and diseases among construction workers constitute a significant public health challenge. While occupational health hazards and conditions in the construction sector are diverse, a burgeoning body of knowledge is emerging about respiratory health hazards and diseases. Yet, there is a notable gap in the existing literature in terms of comprehensive syntheses of the available evidence on this topic. In light of this research gap, this study systematically reviewed the global evidence on occupational health hazards and related respiratory health conditions among construction workers.
METHODS
Using meta-aggregation, guided by the Condition (respiratory health conditions), Context (construction industry) and Population (construction workers) (CoCoPop) framework and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, literature searches were conducted on Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science and Google Scholar for relevant studies on respiratory health conditions affecting construction workers. Four eligibility criteria were used in scrutinising studies for inclusion. The quality of the included studies was assessed based on Joanna Briggs Institute's Critical Appraisal tool, while the reporting of the results was guided by the Synthesis Without Meta-analysis guidelines.
RESULTS
From an initial pool of 256 studies from the various databases, 25 studies published between 2012 and October 2022 were identified as meeting the inclusion criteria. In all, 16 respiratory health conditions were identified, with cough (ie, dry and with phlegm), dyspnoea/breathlessness and asthma emerging as the top three respiratory conditions among construction workers. The study identified six overarching themes of hazards that are associated with respiratory health conditions among construction workers. These hazards include exposure to dust, respirable crystalline silica, fumes, vapours, asbestos fibres and gases. Smoking and extended period of exposure to the respiratory hazard were found to increase the risk of contracting respiratory diseases.
CONCLUSIONS
Our systematic review indicates that construction workers are exposed to hazards and conditions that have adverse effects on their health and well-being. Given the considerable impact that work-related health hazards can have on the health and socioeconomic well-being of construction workers, we suggest that the implementation of a comprehensive occupational health programme is essential. Such a programme would extend beyond the mere provision of personal protective equipment and would incorporate a range of proactive measures aimed at controlling the hazards and mitigating the risk of exposure to the occupational health hazards.
Topics: Humans; Occupational Exposure; Construction Industry; Respiratory Tract Diseases
PubMed: 37364917
DOI: 10.1136/bmjresp-2023-001736 -
Cureus Feb 2021At present, the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is causing a major pandemic. COVID-19 is caused by the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)....
At present, the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is causing a major pandemic. COVID-19 is caused by the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). In COVID-19, the patient usually presents with fever, dry cough, and respiratory manifestations. However, the involvement of other systems has also been reported in the literature. Abdominal pain, diarrhea, vomiting, and nausea are the predominant gastrointestinal (GI) manifestations underlined in the literature. We conducted a literature search using four databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and Clinicaltrials.gov). Our search strategy included Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms and keywords for COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, and GI system from inception to October 2020. After excluding duplicates, review articles, and non-relevant articles, we included 20 studies out of 842 articles reporting GI manifestations in COVID-19 patients. Using Cochrane RevMan version 5.4 (Cochrane, London, UK), a compute pooled analysis using a random-effect model was performed. Our study included 6,022 patients with a median age of 49.5 years. Pooled analysis via random effect model revealed an increased risk of severe COVID-19 in patients manifesting GI symptoms with an odds ratio (OR) of 2.07 (95% Confidence Interval [CI]: 1.34-3.18) with I=41%). Odds of mortality in COVID-19 with GI manifestation and hepatic abnormalities included 0.92 (95% CI: 0.50-1.69) (I=57%) and 1.26 (95% CI: 0.67-2.37) (I=0%), respectively. Severe COVID-19 may have a strong association with GI manifestations and have a significant impact on GI practice. Holistic knowledge of the spectrum of the GI consequences in COVID-19 is crucial to get a hold of virus spread. In this article, we have summarized the association of GI manifestations in severe COVID-19 patients.
PubMed: 33738161
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.13317 -
Cell Journal Feb 2024Exposure to phosgene, a colourless poisonous gas, can lead to various health issues including eye irritation, a dry and burning throat, vomiting, coughing, the...
Exposure to phosgene, a colourless poisonous gas, can lead to various health issues including eye irritation, a dry and burning throat, vomiting, coughing, the production of foamy sputum, difficulty in breathing, and chest pain. This systematic review aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the clinical manifestations and treatment of phosgene toxicity by systematically analyzing available literature. The search was carried out on various scientific online databases to include related studies based on inclusion and exclusion criteria with the use of PRISMA guidelines. The quality of the studies was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT). Thirteen articles were included in this study after the screening process. Inhalation was found to be the primary health problem of phosgene exposure with respiratory symptoms such as coughing and dyspnea. Chest pain and pulmonary oedema were also observed in some cases. Furthermore, pulmonary crackle was the most common reported physical examination. Beyond respiratory tract health issues, other organs involvements such as cardiac, skin, eye, and renal were also reported in some studies. The symptoms can occur within minutes to hours after exposure, and the severity of symptoms depends on the amount of inhaled phosgene. The findings showed that bronchodilators can alleviate symptoms of bronchoconstriction caused by phosgene. Oxygen therapy is essential for restoring oxygen levels and improving respiratory function in cases of hypoxemia. In severe cases, endotracheal intubation and invasive mechanical ventilation are used for artificial respiration, along with the removal of tracheal secretions and pulmonary oedema fluid through suctioning as crucial components of supportive therapy.
PubMed: 38459726
DOI: 10.22074/cellj.2024.2011864.1405