Diaphragm dysfunction in mechanically ventilated patients is associated with poor outcome. Maximal inspiratory pressure (MIP) can be used to evaluate inspiratory muscle function. However, it is unclear whether respiratory weakness is independently associated with long-term mortality. The aim of this study was to determine if low MIP is independently associated with one-year mortality. We conducted a prospective observational cohort study in an 18-bed ICU. Adults requiring at least 24 hours of mechanical ventilation with scheduled extubation and no evidence of pre-existing muscle weakness underwent MIP evaluation just before extubation. Patients were divided into two groups: low MIP (MIP ≤30 cmH2O) and high MIP (MIP >30 cmH2O). Mortality was recorded for one year after extubation. For the survival analysis, the effect of low MIP was assessed using the log-rank test. The independent effect of low MIP on post mechanical ventilation mortality was analyzed using a multivariable Cox regression model. One hundred and twenty-four patients underwent MIP evaluation (median age 66 years (25th–75th percentile 56–74), Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS) 2 = 45 (33–57), duration of mechanical ventilation 7 days (4–10)). Fifty-four percent of patients had low MIP. One-year mortality was 31 % (95 % CI 0.21, 0.43) in the low MIP group and 7 % (95 % CI 0.02, 0.16) in the high MIP group. After adjustment for SAPS 2 score, body mass index and duration of mechanical ventilation, low MIP was independently associated with one-year mortality (hazard ratio 4.41, 95 % CI 1.5, 12.9, p = 0.007). Extubation failure was also associated with low MIP (relative risk 3.0, 95 % CI 1, -9.6; p = 0.03) but tracheostomy and ICU length of stay were not. Low MIP is frequent in patients on mechanical ventilation and is an independent risk factor for long-term mortality in ICU patients requiring mechanical ventilation. MIP is easily evaluated at the patient’s bedside. This study was retrospectively registered in www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02363231) in February 2015.

Objective: The aim of this pilot study was to assess physical fitness and its relationship with functional dyspnea in survivors of COVID-19 6 months after their discharge from the hospital. Methods: Data collected routinely from people referred for cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) following hospitalization for COVID-19 were retrospectively analyzed. Persistent dyspnea was assessed using the modified Medical Research Council dyspnea scale. Results: Twenty-three people with persistent symptoms were referred for CPET. Mean modified Medical Research Council dyspnea score was 1 (SD = 1) and was significantly associated with peak oxygen uptake (VO2peak; %) (rho = −0.49). At 6 months, those hospitalized in the general ward had a relatively preserved VO2peak (87% [SD = 20]), whereas those who had been in the intensive care unit had a moderately reduced VO2peak (77% [SD = 15]). Of note, the results of the CPET revealed that, in all individuals, respiratory equivalents were high, power-to-weight ratios were low, and those who had been in the intensive care unit had a relatively low ventilatory efficiency (mean VE/VCO2 slope = 34 [SD = 5]). Analysis of each individual showed that none had a breathing reserve 90%. Conclusion: At 6 months, persistent dyspnea was associated with reduced physical fitness. This study offers initial insights into the mid-term physical fitness of people who required hospitalization for COVID-19. It also provides novel pathophysiological clues about the underlaying mechanism of the physical limitations associated with persistent dyspnea. Those with persistent dyspnea should be offered a tailored rehabilitation intervention, which should probably include muscle reconditioning, breathing retraining, and perhaps respiratory muscle training. Impact: This study is the first, to our knowledge, to show that a persistent breathing disorder (in addition to muscle deconditioning) can explain persistent symptoms 6 months after hospitalization for COVID-19 infection and suggests that a specific rehabilitation intervention is warranted.

How effective is home-based exercise therapy delivered using advanced telehealth technology (ATT-ET) for people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) compared with: no exercise therapy (ET), in/outpatient ET, and home-based ET without ATT? Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials. People with stable COPD referred for ET. ATT-ET. Exercise capacity, quality of life, functional dyspnoea, cost-effectiveness and various secondary outcomes. Fifteen eligible trials involved 1,522 participants. Compared with no ET, ATT-ET improved exercise capacity (four studies, 6-minute walk test MD 15 m, 95% CI 5 to 24) and probably improved quality of life (four studies, SMD 0.22, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.43) and functional dyspnoea (two studies, Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire-Dyspnoea MD 2, 95% CI 0 to 4). ATT-ET had a similar effect as in/outpatient ET on functional dyspnoea (two studies, SMD -0.05, 95% CI -0.39 to 0.29) and a similar or better effect on quality of life (two studies, SMD 0.23, 95% CI -0.04 to 0.50) but its relative effect on exercise capacity was very uncertain (three studies, 6-minute walk test MD 6 m, 95% CI -26 to 37). ATT-ET had a similar effect as home-based ET without ATT on exercise capacity (three studies, 6-minute walk test MD 2 m, 95% CI -16 to 19) and similar or better effects on quality of life (three studies, SMD 0.79, 95% CI -0.04 to 1.62) and functional dyspnoea (two studies, Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire-Dyspnoea MD 2, 95% CI 0 to 4). ATT-ET had effects on most secondary outcomes that were similar to or better than each comparator. ATT-ET improves exercise capacity, functional dyspnoea and quality of life compared with no ET, although some benefits may be small. Its benefits are generally similar to in/outpatient ET and similar to or better than home-based ET without ATT. PROSPERO CRD42020165773.

The implementation of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) is a challenge for healthcare systems, especially in case of patients undergoing major surgery. Despite a proven significant reduction in postoperative complications and hospital lengths of stay, ERAS protocols are inconsistently used in real-world practice, and barriers have been poorly described in a cohort comprising medical and paramedical professionals. This study aims to assess the proportion of French healthcare providers who practiced ERAS and to identify barriers to its implementation amongst those surveyed. We conducted a prospective cross-sectional study to survey healthcare providers about their practice of ERAS using an online questionnaire. Healthcare providers were contacted through hospital requests, private hospital group requests, professional corporation requests, social networks, and personal contacts. The questionnaire was also designed to explore barriers to ERAS implementation. Identified barriers were allocated by two independent assessors to one of the fourteen domains of the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF), which is an integrative framework based on behavior change theories that can be used to identify issues relating to evidence on the implementation of best practice in healthcare settings. One hundred and fifty-three French healthcare providers answered the online questionnaire (76% female, median age 35 years (IQR: 29 to 48)). Physiotherapists, nurses, and dieticians were the most represented professions (31.4%, 24.2%, and, 14.4%, respectively). Amongst those surveyed, thirty-one practiced ERAS (20.3%, 95%CI: 13.9 to 26.63). Major barriers to ERAS practice were related to the “Environmental context and resources” domain (57.6%, 95%CI: 49.5–65.4), e.g., lack of professionals, funding, and coordination, and the “Knowledge” domain (52.8%, 95%CI: 44.7–60.8), e.g., ERAS unawareness. ERAS in major surgery is seldom practiced in France due to the unfavorable environment (i.e., logistics issues, and lack of professionals and funding) and a low rate of procedure awareness. Future studies should focus on devising and assessing strategies (e.g., education and training, collaboration, institutional support, the development of healthcare networks, and leveraging telehealth and technology) to overcome these barriers, thereby promoting the wider implementation of ERAS.

Background Thoracic surgery is the optimal treatment for early-stage lung cancer, but there is a high risk of postoperative morbidity. Therefore, it is necessary to evaluate patients’ preoperative general condition and cardiorespiratory capacity to determine the risk of postoperative complications. The objective of this study was to assess whether the stair-climbing test could be used in the preoperative evaluation of lung resection patients to predict postoperative morbidity following thoracic surgery. Methods We performed a systematic review and a meta-analysis on the association between stair-climbing test result and morbidity/mortality after thoracic surgery. We analysed all articles published until May 2020 in the following databases: Pubmed/Medline, Pedro, The Cochrane library, Embase and CINAHL. The risk of bias was assessed using the Quality in Prognosis Studies tool. This meta-analysis is registered as PROSPERO CRD42019121348. Results 13 articles were included in the systematic review for a total of 2038 patients and 6 in the meta-analysis. There were multiple test evaluation criteria: rise time, height, desaturation and heart rate change. For the meta-analysis, we were able to pool data on the height of rise at a variable threshold: risk ratio 2.34 (95% CI 1.59 to 3.43) with I²=53% (p=0.06). The threshold for occurrence of complications was estimated at a 10 m climb. Conclusions Our results indicate that the stair-climbing test could be used as a first-line functional screening test to predict postoperative morbidity following thoracic surgery and that patients with a poor test result (<10 m) should be referred to formal cardiopulmonary exercise testing.

Background and objective: We hypothesized that by reducing respiratory work and improving gas exchange, nasal high flow (NHF) would improve exercise tolerance in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) following respiratory exacerbation.Methods: This was a monocentric, randomized, controlled crossover study. Patients with severe to very severe COPD carried out two high‐intensity constant work‐rate exercise tests (CWRET) with and without NHF on two consecutive days. The primary outcome was the mean difference in endurance time between both conditions. The secondary aims included vastus lateralis oxygenation (StO₂), dyspnoea, leg discomfort, maximal inspiratory pressure (MIP), transcutaneous CO₂ pressure (PtcCO₂), respiratory rate (RR), heart rate (HR) and pulsed O₂ saturation (SpO₂), as well as the patients' opinions of the device.Results: A total of 19 patients were included (mean forced expiratory volume in 1 s = 28.7 ± 10.8%, age = 62.1 ± 9.1 years). No significant differences in endurance time during the CWRET were found between the two test conditions (−66.58 (95% CI: −155.9 to 22.7) s, P = 0.12). StO₂, PtCO₂ and HR were reduced at the end of the exercise with NHF (−2.1% (95% CI: −4.3 to −0.0); −1.3 mm Hg (95% CI: −2.5 to −0.2); −2.7 bpm (95% CI: −5.0 to −0.5), respectively, P ≤ 0.05). No significant differences were found for any of the other secondary outcomes. Half of the patients evaluated the device as being moderately to very uncomfortable.Conclusion: NHF during exercise did not increase endurance time in patients with COPD following exacerbation.Clinical trial registration: NCT03058081 at clinicaltrials.gov