The Utility of Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing in Difficult Asthma

Background: Unexplained persistent breathlessness in patients with difficult asthma despite multiple treatments is a common clinical problem. Cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPX) may help identify the mechanism causing these symptoms, allowing appropriate management.

Methods: This was a retrospective analysis of patients attending a specialist-provided service for difficult asthma who proceeded to CPX as part of our evaluation protocol. Patient demographics, lung function, and use of health care and rescue medication were compared with those in patients with refractory asthma. Medication use 6 months following CPX was compared with treatment during CPX.

Results: Of 302 sequential referrals, 39 patients underwent CPX. A single explanatory feature was identified in 30 patients and two features in nine patients: hyperventilation (n = 14), exercise-induced bronchoconstriction (n = 8), submaximal test (n = 8), normal test (n = 8), ventilatory limitation (n = 7), deconditioning (n = 2), cardiac ischemia (n = 1). Compared with patients with refractory asthma, patients without “pulmonary limitation” on CPX were prescribed similar doses of inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) (median, 1,300 µg [interquartile range (IQR), 800-2,000 µg] vs 1,800 µg [IQR, 1,000-2,000 µg]) and rescue oral steroid courses in the previous year (median, 5 [1-6] vs 5 [1-6]). In this group 6 months post-CPX, ICS doses were reduced (median, 1,300 µg [IQR, 800-2,000 µg] to 800 µg [IQR, 400-1,000 µg]; P < .001) and additional medication treatment was withdrawn (n = 7). Patients with pulmonary limitation had unchanged ICS doses post CPX and additional therapies were introduced.

Conclusions: In difficult asthma, CPX can confirm that persistent exertional breathlessness is due to asthma but can also identify other contributing factors. Patients with nonpulmonary limitation are prescribed inappropriately high doses of steroid therapy, and CPX can identify the primary mechanism of breathlessness, facilitating steroid reduction.

Exercise and Auricular Acupuncture for Chronic Low Back Pain: A Feasibility Randomised Controlled Trial

Objectives: To evaluate the feasibility of a randomized-controlled trial (RCT) investigating the effects of adding auricular acupuncture (AA) to exercise for participants with chronic low-back pain (CLBP). Methods: Participants with CLBP were recruited from primary care and a university population and were randomly allocated (n=51) to 1 of 2 groups: (1) "Exercise Alone (E)"-12-week program consisting of 6 weeks of supervised exercise followed by 6 weeks unsupervised exercise (n=27); or (2) "Exercise and AA (EAA)"-12-week exercise program and AA (n=24). Outcome measures were recorded at baseline, week 8, week 13, and 6 months. The primary outcome measure was the Oswestry Disability Questionnaire. Results: Participants in the EAA group demonstrated a greater mean improvement of 10.7% points (95% confidence interval, -15.3,-5.7) (effect size=1.20) in the Oswestry Disability Questionnaire at 6 months compared with 6.7% points (95% confidence interval, -11.4,-1.9) in the E group (effect size=0.58). There was also a trend towards a greater mean improvement in quality of life, LBP intensity and bothersomeness, and fear-avoidance beliefs in the EAA group. The dropout rate for this trial was lower than anticipated (15% at 6 mo), adherence with exercise was similar (72% E; 65% EAA). Adverse effects for AA ranged from 1% to 14% of participants. Discussion: Findings of this study showed that a main RCT is feasible and that 56 participants per group would need to be recruited, using multiple recruitment approaches. AA was safe and demonstrated additional benefits when combined with exercise for people with CLBP, which requires confirmation in a fully powered RCT.

UNISTEP (University Students Exercise and Physical Activity) Study: A Pilot Study of the Effects of Accumulating 10,000 Steps on Health and Fitness Among University Students.

BACKGROUND: Recent public health initiatives have promoted accumulating 10,000 steps per day. Little previous research has evaluated its effects in young adults. The aim of this study was to determine the effects of taking 10,000 steps per day on fitness and cardiovascular risk factors in sedentary university students. METHODS: Healthy, sedentary students (mean age 21.16 ± SD 6.17) were randomly allocated to take 10,000 steps per day or to a control group who maintained their habitual activity. Members of the 10,000 step group wore a pedometer and reported daily step count in a diary. Outcome measurements (20-meter multistage shuttle run, BMI, and blood pressure) were measured before and after 6 weeks. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the groups at baseline. After 6 weeks, the 10,000 steps group were taking significantly more steps (8824.1 ± SD 5379.3 vs. 12635.9 ± SD 6851.3; P = .03).No changes were observed in fitness, or BMI (P > .05). Significant reductions in blood pressure (P = .04) in the 10,000 step group. CONCLUSIONS: A daily target of 10,000 steps may be an appropriate intervention in sedentary university students to increase their physical activity levels. The positive health benefits of simple everyday physical activity should be promoted among health professionals.