Background: The major reasons to treat sarcoidosis are to lower the morbidity and mortality risk or to improve quality of life (QoL). The indication for treatment varies depending on which manifestation is the cause of symptoms: lungs, heart, brain, skin or other manifestations. While glucocorticoids remain the first choice for initial treatment of symptomatic disease, prolonged use is associated with significant toxicity. Glucocorticoid-sparing alternatives are available. The presented treatment guidelines aim to provide guidance to physicians treating the very heterogenous sarcoidosis manifestations. Methods: A European Respiratory Society Task Force committee composed of clinicians, methodologists and patients with experience in sarcoidosis developed recommendations based on the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations) methodology. The committee developed eight PICO (Patients, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes) questions and these were used to make specific evidence-based recommendations. Results: The Task Force committee delivered 12 recommendations for seven PICOs. These included treatment of pulmonary, cutaneous, cardiac and neurologic disease as well as fatigue. One PICO question regarding small-fibre neuropathy had insufficient evidence to support a recommendation. In addition to the recommendations, the committee provided information on how they use alternative treatments, when there was insufficient evidence to support a recommendation. Conclusions: There are many treatments available to treat sarcoidosis. Given the diverse nature of the disease, treatment decisions require an assessment of organ involvement, risk for significant morbidity, and impact on QoL of the disease and treatment.

Acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are associated with a significant mortality, health and economic burden. Their diagnosis, assessment and management remain suboptimal and unchanged for decades. Recent clinical and translational studies revealed that the significant heterogeneity in mechanisms and outcomes of exacerbations could be resolved by grouping them etiologically. This is anticipated to lead to a better understanding of the biological processes that underlie each type of exacerbation and to allow the introduction of precision medicine interventions that could improve outcomes. This review summarises novel data on the diagnosis, phenotyping, targeted treatment and prevention of COPD exacerbations.

Clinical record keeping is an integral component in good professional practice and the delivery of quality healthcare. Regardless of the form of the records ( i.e. electronic or paper), good clinical record keeping should enable continuity of care and should enhance communication between different healthcare professionals. Consequently, clinical records should be updated, where appropriate, by all members of the multidisciplinary team that are involved in a patient’s care (physicians, surgeons, nurses, pharmacists, physiotherapists, occupational therapists, psychologists, chaplains, administrators or students). Should the need arise patients themselves should have access to their records to be able to see what has been done and what has been considered. Clinical records are also valuable documents to audit the quality of healthcare services offered and can also be used for investigating serious incidents, patient complaints and compensation cases. In this issue of Breathe we will present the importance of keeping good clinical records, ways of facilitating this and an overview of legal aspects linked with clinical record keeping. There is also a list of suggested reading from several countries that may prove useful [1–13]. Clinical record keeping is integral to good professional practice and the delivery of quality healthcare