Search

Background: Adults living with severe asthma have lower physical activity levels, particularly high-intensity physical activity, compared with their healthy peers. Physical inactivity is associated with increased morbidity and mortality., Objective: To understand patient and health care professional attitudes toward exercise and physical activity to inform future strategies for the improvement of healthy lifestyle behaviors, including exercise., Methods: Participants recruited from a specialist difficult asthma service were interviewed individually, and health care professionals (HCPs) from primary care, secondary care, and a tertiary center were invited to attend focus groups. Interviews and focus groups were transcribed verbatim. We performed thematic analysis on interviews and focus groups separately, followed by an adapted framework analysis to analyze datasets together., Results: Twenty-nine people with severe asthma participated in a semi-structured interview. A total of 51 HCPs took part in eight focus groups across the East Midlands, United Kingdom. Final analysis resulted in three major themes: barriers to exercise and exercise counseling - in which patients and HCPs identified disease and non-disease factors affecting those living with severe asthma; attitudes toward HCP support for exercise - highlighting education needs for HCPs and preference for supervised exercise programs; and areas for system improvement in supporting patients and HCPs - challenges exist across health sectors that limit patient support are described., Conclusions: Patients identified the important role of HCPs in supporting and advising on lifestyle change. Despite a preference for supervised exercise programs, both patient and HCP barriers existed. To meet patients' varied support needs, improved integration of services is required and HCP skills need extending., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The management of severe asthma poses many challenges related to treatment, adherence, and psychosocial morbidity. There is little direct data from the patient perspective to understand and negotiate the complexities of managing severe asthma., Objective: To explore the patient perceptions of living with severe asthma and the experience of managing severe asthma, in order to better understand the support that might promote more effective self-management for severe asthma., Methods: Participants were recruited from a specialist Difficult Asthma Service. Semistructured interviews were conducted by researchers independent of the patient's care. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and inductive thematic analysis was performed., Results: Twenty-nine participants (13 male: mean [standard deviation] age, 49.5 [13.6] years: mean Asthma Control Questionnaire 2.2 [1.2]) participated in an interview. Analysis resulted in 4 major themes describing the experience and challenges to managing severe asthma: understanding of severe asthma, emotional impact of living with severe asthma (subtheme: fear of hospitalization), public perceptions of asthma, and concerns about medications., Conclusions: Health care professionals need to consider and discuss with patients their perceptions of severe asthma and the relevant treatments; particular attention should focus around education of disease control and actively exploring thoughts around hospitalization. Our data highlight the potential for psychological and social support to enhance self-management by directly addressing the wide-ranging individual challenges patients face. There is also a need for greater public awareness and education about severe asthma to minimize patient distress particularly in the work environment., (Copyright © 2019 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Patients with difficult-to-control asthma consume 50-60% of healthcare costs attributed to asthma and cost approximately five-times more than patients with mild stable disease. Recent evidence demonstrates that not all patients with asthma have a typical type 2 (T2)-driven eosinophilic inflammation. These asthmatics have been called 'T2-low asthma' and have a minimal response to corticosteroid therapy. Adjustment of corticosteroid treatment using sputum eosinophil counts from induced sputum has demonstrated reduced severe exacerbation rates and optimized corticosteroid dose. However, it has been challenging to move induced sputum into the clinical setting. There is therefore a need to examine novel algorithms to target appropriate levels of corticosteroid treatment in difficult asthma, particularly in T2-low asthmatics. This study examines whether a composite non-invasive biomarker algorithm predicts exacerbation risk in patients with asthma on high-dose inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) (± long-acting beta agonist) treatment, and evaluates the utility of this composite score to facilitate personalized biomarker-specific titration of corticosteroid therapy., Methods/design: Patients recruited to this pragmatic, multi-centre, single-blinded randomised controlled trial are randomly allocated into either a biomarker controlled treatment advisory algorithm or usual care group in a ratio of 4:1. The primary outcome measure is the proportion of patients with any reduction in ICS or oral corticosteroid dose from baseline to week 48. Secondary outcomes include the rate of protocol-defined severe exacerbations per patient per year, time to first severe exacerbation from randomisation, dose of inhaled steroid at the end of the study, cumulative dose of inhaled corticosteroid during the study, proportion of patients on oral corticosteroids at the end of the study, proportion of patients who decline to progress to oral corticosteroids despite composite biomarker score of 2, frequency of hospital admission for asthma, change in the 7-item Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ-7), Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ), forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), exhaled nitric oxide, blood eosinophil count, and periostin levels from baseline to week 48. Blood will also be taken for whole blood gene expression; serum, plasma, and urine will be stored for validation of additional biomarkers., Discussion: Multi-centre trials present numerous logistical issues that have been addressed to ensure minimal bias and robustness of study conduct., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02717689 . Registered on 16 March 2016.