Reliability, validity and minimal detectable change of computerized respiratory sounds in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Reliability and Validity of Computerized Adventitious Respiratory Sounds in People with Bronchiectasis

Background: Computerized adventitious respiratory sounds (ARS), such as crackles and wheezes, have been poorly explored in bronchiectasis, especially their measurement properties. This study aimed to test the reliability and validity of ARS in bronchiectasis. Methods: Respiratory sounds were recorded twice at 4 chest locations on 2 assessment sessions (7 days apart) in people with bronchiectasis and daily sputum expectoration. The total number of crackles, number of wheezes and wheeze occupation rate (%) were the parameters extracted. Results: 28 participants (9 men; 62 ± 12 y) were included. Total number of crackles and wheezes showed moderate within-day (ICC 0.87, 95% CI 0.74−0.94; ICC 0.86, 95% CI 0.71−0.93) and between-day reliability (ICC 0.70, 95% CI 0.43−0.86; ICC 0.78, 95% CI 0.56−0.90) considering all chest locations and both respiratory phases; wheeze occupation rate showed moderate within-day reliability (ICC 0.86, 95% CI 0.71−0.93), but poor between-day reliability (ICC 0.71, 95% CI 0.33−0.87). Bland−Altman plots revealed no systematic bias, but wide limits of agreement, particularly in the between-days analysis. All ARS parameters correlated moderately with the amount of daily sputum expectoration (r > 0.4; p < 0.05). No other significant correlations were observed. Conclusion: ARS presented moderate reliability and were correlated with the daily sputum expectoration in bronchiectasis. The use of sequential measurements may be an option to achieve greater accuracy when ARS are used to monitor or assess the effects of physiotherapy interventions in this population.

[Lung sounds can be used as an indicator for assessing severity of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease at the initial diagnosis]

OBJECTIVE

To assess the value of pulmonary auscultation for evaluating the severity of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) at the initial diagnosis.

METHODS

The patients with newly diagnosed COPD in our hospital between May, 2016 and May, 2019 were enrolled in this study. According to the findings of pulmonary auscultation, the lung sounds were classified into 5 groups: normal breathing sounds, weakened breathing sounds, weakened breathing sounds with wheezing, obviously weakened breathing sounds, and obviously weakened breathing sounds with wheezing. The pulmonary function of the patients was graded according to GOLD guidelines, and the differential diagnosis of COPD from asthmatic asthma COPD overlap (ACO) was made based on the GOLD guidelines and the European Respiratory Criteria.

RESULTS

A total of 1046 newly diagnosed COPD patients were enrolled, including 949 male and 97 female patients with a mean age of 62.6± 8.71. According to the GOLD criteria, 88.1% of the patients were identified to have moderate or above COPD, 50.0% to have severe or above COPD; a further diagnosis of ACO was made in 347 (33.2%) of the patients. ANOVA analysis showed significant differences in disease course, FEV1, FEV1%, FEV1/FVC, FVC, FVC% and mMRC among the 5 auscultation groups (P < 0.001), but FENO did not differ significantly among them (P=0.097). The percentage of patients with wheezing in auscultation was significantly greater in ACO group than in COPD group (P < 0.001). Spearman correlation analysis showed that lung sounds was significantly correlated with disease severity, FEV1, FEV1%, FVC and FVC% of the patients (P < 0.001); Multiple linear regression analysis showed that a longer disease course, a history of smoking and lung sounds were all associated with poorer lung functions and a greater disease severity.

CONCLUSIONS

Lung sounds can be used as an indicator for assessing the severity of COPD at the initial diagnosis.

Feasibility of computerized adventitious respiratory sounds to assess the effects of airway clearance techniques in patients with bronchiectasis

Objective: To examine the feasibility of adventitious respiratory sound (ARS) as an outcome measure to assess the effects of airway clearance techniques (ACTs) in outpatients with bronchiectasis. Methods: ARS were registered pre/post four ACTs sessions. Clinical outcomes included: number of crackles (coarse and fine), number of wheezes (monophonic and polyphonic), wheezes occupation rate (%) and sputum quantity. Feasibility outcomes of ARS included: reasons for exclusion, suitability, safety, equipment and time required, magnitude of change after intervention and sample size estimation. Results: Seven patients (49.7 ± 20.5 years; FEV₁ 69.3 ± 15.8% predicted) were included. Recordings from four patients were excluded due to excessive environment noise. All ARS measurements were completed without any adverse events. An electronic stethoscope was acquired and the time spent to complete each assessment was 6 ± 3.5 min. The largest changes were observed for number of expiratory coarse crackles [effect size (95%CI) ES = 0.40 (0.01-0.79)], which correlated moderately with sputum quantity (r = 0.56), and inspiratory monophonic wheezes [ES = 0.61 (0.22-1.00)]. The estimated sample size for a full crossover trial was 46. Conclusions: ARS is feasible to assess the effects of ACTs in patients with bronchiectasis. Expiratory coarse crackles seem to be the most appropriate ARS parameter, but this finding needs to be confirmed in an adequately powered trial.

Minimal Important and Detectable Differences of Respiratory Measures in Outpatients with AECOPD†

Interpreting clinical changes during acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) is challenging due to the absence of established minimal detectable (MDD) and important (MID) differences for most respiratory measures. This study established MDD and MID for respiratory measures in outpatients with AECOPD following pharmacological treatment. COPD assessment test (CAT), modified Borg scale (MBS), modified British Medical Research Council (mMRC) questionnaire, peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO₂), computerised respiratory sounds and forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV₁) were collected within 24-48 hour of an AECOPD and after 45 days of pharmacological treatment. MID and MDD were calculated using anchor- (receiver operating characteristic and linear regression analysis) and distribution-based methods (effect size, SEM, 0.5*SD and MDC95) and pooled using Meta XL. Forty-four outpatients with AECOPD (31♂; 68.2 ± 9.1 years; FEV₁ 51.1 ± 20.3%predicted) participated. Significant correlations with CAT were found for the MBS (r = 0.34), mMRC (r = 0.39) and FEV₁ (r = 0.33), resulting in MIDs of 0.8, 0.5-0.6 and 0.03L, respectively. MDD of 0.5-1.4 (MBS), 0.4-1.2 (mMRC), 0.10-0.28L (FEV₁), 3.6-10.1% (FEV₁%predicted), 0.9-2.4% (SpO₂), 0.7-1.9 (number of inspiratory crackles), 1.1-4.5 (number of expiratory crackles), 7.1-25.8% (inspiratory wheeze rate) and 11.8-63.0% (expiratory wheeze rate) were found. Pooled data of MID/MDD showed that improvements of 0.9 for the MBS, 0.6 for the mMRC, 0.15L for the FEV₁, 7.6% for the FEV₁%predicted, 1.5% for the SpO₂, 1.1 for the inspiratory and 2.4 for the number of expiratory number of crackles, 14.1% for the inspiratory and 32.5% for the expiratory wheeze rate are meaningful following an AECOPD managed with pharmacological treatment on an outpatient basis.