-
Internal and Emergency Medicine Aug 2023Acute dyspnea represents one of the most frequent symptoms leading to emergency room evaluation. Its significant prognostic value warrants a careful evaluation. The... (Review)
Review
Acute dyspnea represents one of the most frequent symptoms leading to emergency room evaluation. Its significant prognostic value warrants a careful evaluation. The differential diagnosis of dyspnea is complex due to the lack of specificity and the loose association between its intensity and the severity of the underlying pathological condition. The initial assessment of dyspnea calls for prompt diagnostic evaluation and identification of optimal monitoring strategy and provides information useful to allocate the patient to the most appropriate setting of care. In recent years, accumulating evidence indicated that lung ultrasound, along with echocardiography, represents the first rapid and non-invasive line of assessment that accurately differentiates heart, lung or extra-pulmonary involvement in patients with dyspnea. Moreover, non-invasive respiratory support modalities such as high-flow nasal oxygen and continuous positive airway pressure have aroused major clinical interest, in light of their efficacy and practicality to treat patients with dyspnea requiring ventilatory support, without using invasive mechanical ventilation. This clinical review is focused on the pathophysiology of acute dyspnea, on its clinical presentation and evaluation, including ultrasound-based diagnostic workup, and on available non-invasive modalities of respiratory support that may be required in patients with acute dyspnea secondary or associated with respiratory failure.
Topics: Humans; Dyspnea; Lung; Emergency Service, Hospital; Respiratory Insufficiency; Ultrasonography
PubMed: 37266791
DOI: 10.1007/s11739-023-03322-8 -
Advances in Therapy Jan 2020Dyspnea is the most common symptom experienced by patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). To avoid exertional dyspnea, many patients adopt a... (Review)
Review
Dyspnea is the most common symptom experienced by patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). To avoid exertional dyspnea, many patients adopt a sedentary lifestyle which predictably leads to extensive skeletal muscle deconditioning, social isolation, and its negative psychological sequalae. This "dyspnea spiral" is well documented and it is no surprise that alleviation of this distressing symptom has become a key objective highlighted across COPD guidelines. In reality, this important goal is often difficult to achieve, and successful symptom management awaits a clearer understanding of the underlying mechanisms of dyspnea and how these can be therapeutically manipulated for the patients' benefit. Current theoretical constructs of the origins of activity-related dyspnea generally endorse the classical demand-capacity imbalance theory. Thus, it is believed that disruption of the normally harmonious relationship between inspiratory neural drive (IND) to breathe and the simultaneous dynamic response of the respiratory system fundamentally shapes the expression of respiratory discomfort in COPD. Sadly, the symptom of dyspnea cannot be eliminated in patients with advanced COPD with relatively fixed pathophysiological impairment. However, there is evidence that effective symptom palliation is possible for many. Interventions that reduce IND, without compromising alveolar ventilation (V), or that improve respiratory mechanics and muscle function, or that address the affective dimension, achieve measurable benefits. A common final pathway of dyspnea relief and improved exercise tolerance across the range of therapeutic interventions (bronchodilators, exercise training, ambulatory oxygen, inspiratory muscle training, and opiate medications) is reduced neuromechanical dissociation of the respiratory system. These interventions, singly and in combination, partially restore more harmonious matching of excessive IND to ventilatory output achieved. In this review we propose, on the basis of a thorough review of the recent literature, that effective dyspnea amelioration requires combined interventions and a structured multidisciplinary approach, carefully tailored to meet the specific needs of the individual.
Topics: Bronchodilator Agents; Dyspnea; Exercise; Exercise Tolerance; Humans; Male; Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive
PubMed: 31673990
DOI: 10.1007/s12325-019-01128-9 -
Chest Jun 2022A cardiopulmonary exercise test (CPET) is ideally suited to quantify exercise tolerance and evaluate the pathophysiological mechanism(s) of dyspnea and exercise... (Review)
Review
A cardiopulmonary exercise test (CPET) is ideally suited to quantify exercise tolerance and evaluate the pathophysiological mechanism(s) of dyspnea and exercise limitation in people with chronic respiratory disease. Although there are several statements on CPET and many outstanding resources detailing the cardiorespiratory and perceptual responses to exercise, limited information is available to support the health care provider in conducting a practical CPET evaluation. This article provides the health care provider with practical and timely information on how to use CPET data to understand dyspnea and exercise intolerance in people with chronic respiratory diseases. Information on CPET protocol, as well as how to evaluate maximal patient effort, peak rate of oxygen consumption, ventilatory demand, pulmonary gas exchange, ventilatory reserve, operating lung volumes, and exertional dyspnea, is presented. Two case examples are also described to highlight how these parameters are evaluated to provide a clinical interpretation of CPET data.
Topics: Dyspnea; Exercise Test; Exercise Tolerance; Humans; Oxygen Consumption; Respiratory Function Tests
PubMed: 35065052
DOI: 10.1016/j.chest.2022.01.021 -
Current Oncology (Toronto, Ont.) Jun 2020Dyspnea is a symptom commonly experienced by cancer patients that causes significant suffering, worsens throughout a patient's disease trajectory, and can be more...
Dyspnea is a symptom commonly experienced by cancer patients that causes significant suffering, worsens throughout a patient's disease trajectory, and can be more difficult to manage than other symptoms. Assessment of dyspnea is best accomplished by a subjective description; physiologic measures are only weakly correlated with the patient's experience. It is important to consider a wide range of possible malignant and nonmalignant causes of dyspnea in cancer patients and to correct underlying causes where possible. For patients with refractory dyspnea, opioids are a safe and effective treatment. Benzodiazepines can be considered, but the evidence for their use is weak. Supplemental oxygen is beneficial if patients are hypoxemic, or if they have concurrent chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Nonpharmacologic strategies such as fan therapy, exercise programs, and pulmonary rehabilitation can also be beneficial. One important diagnosis to consider in all cancer patients is venous thromboembolism. Prompt evaluation and treatment are vital to improving symptoms and outcomes for patients. Although dyspnea is common and potentially debilitating in cancer patients, it can be effectively managed with a structured approach to rule out reversible causes while concurrently treating the patient using appropriate therapeutic strategies.
Topics: Dyspnea; Humans; Palliative Care
PubMed: 32669923
DOI: 10.3747/co.27.6413 -
American Family Physician May 2020Dyspnea is a symptom arising from a complex interplay of diseases and physiologic states and is commonly encountered in primary care. It is considered chronic if present... (Review)
Review
Dyspnea is a symptom arising from a complex interplay of diseases and physiologic states and is commonly encountered in primary care. It is considered chronic if present for more than one month. As a symptom, dyspnea is a predictor for all-cause mortality. The likeliest causes of dyspnea are disease states involving the cardiac or pulmonary systems such as asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, heart failure, pneumonia, and coronary artery disease. A detailed history and physical examination should begin the workup; results should drive testing. Approaching testing in stages beginning with first-line tests, including a complete blood count, basic chemistry panel, electrocardiography, chest radiography, spirometry, and pulse oximetry, is recommended. If no cause is identified, second-line noninvasive testing such as echocardiography, cardiac stress tests, pulmonary function tests, and computed tomography scan of the lungs is suggested. Final options include more invasive tests that should be done in collaboration with specialty help. There are three main treatment and management goals: correctly identify the underlying disease process and treat appropriately, optimize recovery, and improve the dyspnea symptoms. The six-minute walk test can be helpful in measuring the effect of ongoing intervention. Care of patients with chronic dyspnea typically requires a multidisciplinary approach, which makes the primary care physician ideal for management.
Topics: Diagnosis, Differential; Dyspnea; Echocardiography; Exercise Test; Humans; Medical History Taking; Physical Examination; Primary Health Care; Respiratory Function Tests
PubMed: 32352727
DOI: No ID Found -
International Journal of Clinical... Oct 2021To identify, systematically evaluate and summarise the best available evidence on the frequency of long COVID-19 (post-acute COVID-19 syndrome), its clinical... (Review)
Review
AIMS
To identify, systematically evaluate and summarise the best available evidence on the frequency of long COVID-19 (post-acute COVID-19 syndrome), its clinical manifestations, and the criteria used for diagnosis.
METHODS
Systematic review conducted with a comprehensive search including formal databases, COVID-19 or SARS-CoV-2 data sources, grey literature, and manual search. We considered for inclusion clinical trials, observational longitudinal comparative and non-comparative studies, cross-sectional, before-and-after, and case series. We assessed the methodological quality by specific tools based on the study designs. We presented the results as a narrative synthesis regarding the frequency and duration of long COVID-19, signs and symptoms, criteria used for diagnosis, and potential risk factors.
RESULTS
We included 25 observational studies with moderate to high methodological quality, considering 5440 participants. The frequency of long COVID-19 ranged from 4.7% to 80%, and the most prevalent signs/symptoms were chest pain (up to 89%), fatigue (up to 65%), dyspnea (up to 61%), and cough and sputum production (up to 59%). Temporal criteria used to define long COVID-19 varied from 3 to 24 weeks after acute phase or hospital discharge. Potentially associated risk factors were old age, female sex, severe clinical status, a high number of comorbidities, hospital admission, and oxygen supplementation at the acute phase. However, limitations related to study designs added uncertainty to this finding. None of the studies assessed the duration of signs/symptoms.
CONCLUSION
The frequency of long COVID-19 reached up to 80% over the studies included and occurred between 3 and 24 weeks after acute phase or hospital discharge. Chest pain, fatigue, dyspnea, and cough were the most reported clinical manifestations attributed to the condition. Based on these systematic review findings, there is an urgent need to understand this emerging, complex and challenging medical condition. Proposals for diagnostic criteria and standard terminology are welcome.
Topics: COVID-19; Cross-Sectional Studies; Dyspnea; Female; Humans; SARS-CoV-2; Post-Acute COVID-19 Syndrome
PubMed: 33977626
DOI: 10.1111/ijcp.14357 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Feb 2021Interstitial lung disease (ILD) is characterised by reduced functional capacity, dyspnoea and exercise-induced hypoxia. Pulmonary rehabilitation is often used to improve... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Interstitial lung disease (ILD) is characterised by reduced functional capacity, dyspnoea and exercise-induced hypoxia. Pulmonary rehabilitation is often used to improve symptoms, health-related quality of life and functional status in other chronic lung conditions. There is accumulating evidence for comparable effects of pulmonary rehabilitation in people with ILD. However, further information is needed to clarify the long-term benefit and to strengthen the rationale for pulmonary rehabilitation to be incorporated into standard clinical management of people with ILD. This review updates the results reported in 2014.
OBJECTIVES
To determine whether pulmonary rehabilitation in people with ILD has beneficial effects on exercise capacity, symptoms, quality of life and survival compared with no pulmonary rehabilitation in people with ILD. To assess the safety of pulmonary rehabilitation in people with ILD.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCO) and PEDro from inception to April 2020. We searched the reference lists of relevant studies, international clinical trial registries and respiratory conference abstracts to look for qualifying studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials and quasi-randomised controlled trials in which pulmonary rehabilitation was compared with no pulmonary rehabilitation or with other therapy in people with ILD of any origin.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We contacted study authors to request missing data and information regarding adverse effects. We specified a priori subgroup analyses for participants with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) and participants with severe lung disease (low diffusing capacity or desaturation during exercise). There were insufficient data to perform the prespecified subgroup analysis for type of exercise training modality.
MAIN RESULTS
For this update, we included an additional 12 studies resulting in a total of 21 studies. We included 16 studies in the meta-analysis (356 participants undertook pulmonary rehabilitation and 319 were control participants). The mean age of participants ranged from 36 to 72 years and included people with ILD of varying aetiology, sarcoidosis or IPF (with mean transfer factor of carbon dioxide (TLCO) % predicted ranging from 37% to 63%). Most pulmonary rehabilitation programmes were conducted in an outpatient setting, with a small number conducted in home-based, inpatient or tele-rehabilitation settings. The duration of pulmonary rehabilitation ranged from three to 48 weeks. There was a moderate risk of bias due to the absence of outcome assessor blinding and intention-to-treat analyses and the inadequate reporting of randomisation and allocation procedures in 60% of the studies. Pulmonary rehabilitation probably improves the six-minute walk distance (6MWD) with mean difference (MD) of 40.07 metres, 95% confidence interval (CI) 32.70 to 47.44; 585 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There may be improvements in peak workload (MD 9.04 watts, 95% CI 6.07 to 12.0; 159 participants; low-certainty evidence), peak oxygen consumption (MD 1.28 mL/kg/minute, 95% CI 0.51 to 2.05; 94 participants; low-certainty evidence) and maximum ventilation (MD 7.21 L/minute, 95% CI 4.10 to 10.32; 94 participants; low-certainty evidence). In the subgroup of participants with IPF, there were comparable improvements in 6MWD (MD 37.25 metres, 95% CI 26.16 to 48.33; 278 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), peak workload (MD 9.94 watts, 95% CI 6.39 to 13.49; low-certainty evidence), VO (oxygen uptake) peak (MD 1.45 mL/kg/minute, 95% CI 0.51 to 2.40; low-certainty evidence) and maximum ventilation (MD 9.80 L/minute, 95% CI 6.06 to 13.53; 62 participants; low-certainty evidence). The effect of pulmonary rehabilitation on maximum heart rate was uncertain. Pulmonary rehabilitation may reduce dyspnoea in participants with ILD (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.36, 95% CI -0.58 to -0.14; 348 participants; low-certainty evidence) and in the IPF subgroup (SMD -0.41, 95% CI -0.74 to -0.09; 155 participants; low-certainty evidence). Pulmonary rehabilitation probably improves health-related quality of life: there were improvements in all four domains of the Chronic Respiratory Disease Questionnaire (CRQ) and the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) for participants with ILD and for the subgroup of people with IPF. The improvement in SGRQ Total score was -9.29 for participants with ILD (95% CI -11.06 to -7.52; 478 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and -7.91 for participants with IPF (95% CI -10.55 to -5.26; 194 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Five studies reported longer-term outcomes, with improvements in exercise capacity, dyspnoea and health-related quality of life still evident six to 12 months following the intervention period (6MWD: MD 32.43, 95% CI 15.58 to 49.28; 297 participants; moderate-certainty evidence; dyspnoea: MD -0.29, 95% CI -0.49 to -0.10; 335 participants; SGRQ Total score: MD -4.93, 95% CI -7.81 to -2.06; 240 participants; low-certainty evidence). In the subgroup of participants with IPF, there were improvements at six to 12 months following the intervention for dyspnoea and SGRQ Impact score. The effect of pulmonary rehabilitation on survival at long-term follow-up is uncertain. There were insufficient data to allow examination of the impact of disease severity or exercise training modality. Ten studies provided information on adverse events; however, there were no adverse events reported during rehabilitation. Four studies reported the death of one pulmonary rehabilitation participant; however, all four studies indicated this death was unrelated to the intervention received.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Pulmonary rehabilitation can be performed safely in people with ILD. Pulmonary rehabilitation probably improves functional exercise capacity, dyspnoea and quality of life in the short term, with benefits also probable in IPF. Improvements in functional exercise capacity, dyspnoea and quality of life were sustained longer term. Dyspnoea and quality of life may be sustained in people with IPF. The certainty of evidence was low to moderate, due to inadequate reporting of methods, the lack of outcome assessment blinding and heterogeneity in some results. Further well-designed randomised trials are needed to determine the optimal exercise prescription, and to investigate ways to promote longer-lasting improvements, particularly for people with IPF.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Dyspnea; Exercise; Exercise Tolerance; Humans; Lung Diseases, Interstitial; Middle Aged; Quality of Life
PubMed: 34559419
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006322.pub4 -
Respiratory Research Jan 2022Unexplained exertional dyspnoea or fatigue can arise from a number of underlying disorders and shows only a weak correlation with resting functional or imaging tests.... (Review)
Review
Unexplained exertional dyspnoea or fatigue can arise from a number of underlying disorders and shows only a weak correlation with resting functional or imaging tests. Noninvasive cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) offers a unique, but still under-utilised and unrecognised, opportunity to study cardiopulmonary and metabolic changes simultaneously. CPET can distinguish between a normal and an abnormal exercise response and usually identifies which of multiple pathophysiological conditions alone or in combination is the leading cause of exercise intolerance. Therefore, it improves diagnostic accuracy and patient health care by directing more targeted diagnostics and facilitating treatment decisions. Consequently, CPET should be one of the early tests used to assess exercise intolerance. However, this test requires specific knowledge and there is still a major information gap for those physicians primarily interested in learning how to systematically analyse and interpret CPET findings. This article describes the underlying principles of exercise physiology and provides a practical guide to performing CPET and interpreting the results in adults.
Topics: Adult; Dyspnea; Exercise Tolerance; Humans; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Respiratory Function Tests
PubMed: 35022059
DOI: 10.1186/s12931-021-01895-6 -
Thorax Jul 2022To investigate superiority of a telerehabilitation programme for COVID-19 (TERECO) over no rehabilitation with regard to exercise capacity, lower limb muscle strength... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
OBJECTIVES
To investigate superiority of a telerehabilitation programme for COVID-19 (TERECO) over no rehabilitation with regard to exercise capacity, lower limb muscle strength (LMS), pulmonary function, health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and dyspnoea.
DESIGN
Parallel-group randomised controlled trial with 1:1 block randomisation.
SETTING
Three major hospitals from Jiangsu and Hubei provinces, China.
PARTICIPANTS
120 formerly hospitalised COVID-19 survivors with remaining dyspnoea complaints were randomised with 61 allocated to control and 59 to TERECO.
INTERVENTION
Unsupervised home-based 6-week exercise programme comprising breathing control and thoracic expansion, aerobic exercise and LMS exercise, delivered via smartphone, and remotely monitored with heart rate telemetry.
OUTCOMES
Primary outcome was 6 min walking distance (6MWD) in metres. Secondary outcomes were squat time in seconds; pulmonary function assessed by spirometry; HRQOL measured with Short Form Health Survey-12 (SF-12) and mMRC-dyspnoea. Outcomes were assessed at 6 weeks (post-treatment) and 28 weeks (follow-up).
RESULTS
Adjusted between-group difference in change in 6MWD was 65.45 m (95% CI 43.8 to 87.1; p<0.001) at post-treatment and 68.62 m (95% CI 46.39 to 90.85; p<0.001) at follow-up. Treatment effects for LMS were 20.12 s (95% CI 12.34 to 27.9; p<0.001) post-treatment and 22.23 s (95% CI 14.24 to 30.21; p<0.001) at follow-up. No group differences were found for lung function except post-treatment maximum voluntary ventilation. Increase in SF-12 physical component was greater in the TERECO group with treatment effects estimated as 3.79 (95% CI 1.24 to 6.35; p=0.004) at post-treatment and 2.69 (95% CI 0.06 to 5.32; p=0.045) at follow-up.
CONCLUSIONS
This trial demonstrated superiority of TERECO over no rehabilitation for 6MWD, LMS, and physical HRQOL.
TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER
ChiCTR2000031834.
Topics: Aftercare; COVID-19; Dyspnea; Humans; Patient Discharge; Quality of Life; Telerehabilitation
PubMed: 34312316
DOI: 10.1136/thoraxjnl-2021-217382 -
Medicine Mar 2021Rehabilitation training is beneficial for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This study was aimed at evaluating the efficacy of muscle training... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Rehabilitation training is beneficial for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This study was aimed at evaluating the efficacy of muscle training on dyspnea.
METHODS
We used 5 common databases for conducting a meta-analysis included PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Science Direct, Web of Science and Clinical Trials.gov, and eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included. The main results of include studies were dyspnea of patients who had a clinical diagnosis of COPD measured using Borg score and Medical Research Council (MRC) or modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) scale as the criteria before and after intervention. The intervention measures included respiratory or expiratory muscles or upper limb (UL) or lower limb (LL) training. The mean differences (MD) with the 95% confidence interval (CI) were considered for summary statistics. We also assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane collaboration's tool, and the value of I2 was applied to evaluate the heterogeneity of the trials.
RESULTS
Fourteen RCTs with 18 interventions (n = 860 participants) were included. Muscle training significantly improved dyspnea during exercise and in the daily life of patients with COPD (MD, 95% CI: -0.58, -0.84 to -0.32, P < .0001 and -0.44, -0.65 to -0.24, P < .0001, respectively). In the subgroup analyses, the trials that used respiratory muscle and UL trainings significantly improved dyspnea during exercise (MD, 95% CI: -0.72, -1.13 to -0.31, P = .0005 and -0.53, -0.91 to -0.15, P = .007, respectively). The studies also showed that the participants in the rehabilitation group, who received respiratory muscle and UL trainings, had a significant improvement of dyspnea in daily life (MD, 95% CI: -0.38, -0.67 to -0.09, P = .01 and -0.51, -0.80 to -0.22, P = .0007, respectively).
CONCLUSION
There were some limitations that most of the subjects in this study were patients with moderate to severe COPD and were male, and the training period and duration were different. The analyses revealed that respiratory muscle and UL trainings can improve dyspnea in patients with COPD during exercise and in daily life.
Topics: Dyspnea; Exercise Tolerance; Exhalation; Humans; Physical Therapy Modalities; Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Respiratory Muscles
PubMed: 33655957
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000024930