Gender differences in the effect of urge-to-cough and dyspnea on perception of pain in healthy adults

Exposure limits for indoor volatile substances concerning the general population: The role of population-based differences in sensory irritation of the eyes and airways for assessment factors

Assessment factors (AFs) are essential in the derivation of occupational exposure limits (OELs) and indoor air quality guidelines. The factors shall accommodate differences in sensitivity between subgroups, i.e., workers, healthy and sick people, and occupational exposure versus life-long exposure for the general population. Derivation of AFs itself is based on empirical knowledge from human and animal exposure studies with immanent uncertainty in the empirical evidence due to knowledge gaps and experimental reliability. Sensory irritation in the eyes and airways constitute about 30-40% of OELs and is an abundant symptom in non-industrial buildings characterizing the indoor air quality and general health. Intraspecies differences between subgroups of the general population should be quantified for the proposal of more 'empirical' based AFs. In this review, we focus on sensitivity differences in sensory irritation about gender, age, health status, and vulnerability in people, based solely on human exposure studies. Females are more sensitive to sensory irritation than males for few volatile substances. Older people appear less sensitive than younger ones. However, impaired defense mechanisms may increase vulnerability in the long term. Empirical evidence of sensory irritation in children is rare and limited to children down to the age of six years. Studies of the nervous system in children compared to adults suggest a higher sensitivity in children; however, some defense mechanisms are more efficient in children than in adults. Usually, exposure studies are performed with healthy subjects. Exposure studies with sick people are not representative due to the deselection of subjects with moderate or severe eye or airway diseases, which likely underestimates the sensitivity of the group of people with diseases. Psychological characterization like personality factors shows that concentrations of volatile substances far below their sensory irritation thresholds may influence the sensitivity, in part biased by odor perception. Thus, the protection of people with extreme personality traits is not feasible by an AF and other mitigation strategies are required. The available empirical evidence comprising age, lifestyle, and health supports an AF of not greater than up to 2 for sensory irritation. Further, general AFs are discouraged for derivation, rather substance-specific derivation of AFs is recommended based on the risk assessment of empirical data, deposition in the airways depending on the substance's water solubility and compensating for knowledge and experimental gaps. Modeling of sensory irritation would be a better 'empirical' starting point for derivation of AFs for children, older, and sick people, as human exposure studies are not possible (due to ethical reasons) or not generalizable (due to self-selection). Dedicated AFs may be derived for environments where dry air, high room temperature, and visually demanding tasks aggravate the eyes or airways than for places in which the workload is balanced, while indoor playgrounds might need other AFs due to physical workload and affected groups of the general population.

Effect of facial skin cooling induced by a handheld fan on the cough reflex threshold and urge to cough induced by citric acid

Chronic cough is a condition that impairs the quality of life of affected patients and may persist despite optimal intervention. Thus, a novel therapeutic approach with broad clinical utility based on the nature of the cough reflex is required.

Facial skin cooling induced by a handheld fan alleviates the cough reflex and the urge to cough induced by citric acidhttp://bit.ly/2m1kzAP

A systematic review of methods of citric acid cough reflex testing

INTRODUCTION

This systematic review summarises and appraises methods of citric acid cough reflex testing (CRT) documented in published literature.

METHODS

Electronic databases, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsychINFO, Scopus were searched up to and including 11th February 2018. Studies reporting a method of citric acid CRT, published in peer-reviewed journals in English or Spanish, were assessed for the inclusion criteria. Of the selected studies, information on the instrumentation and CRT protocol was extracted.

RESULTS

A total of 129 studies were included. Instrumentation and protocols differed widely across studies. Reporting of methods of citric acid CRT was sub-standard, with many crucial methodological components omitted from published manuscripts, preventing their full replication.

CONCLUSIONS

Considerable methodological variability exists for citric acid CRT in published literature. The findings suggest that caution is warranted in comparing citric acid cough thresholds across studies. Full replication of previously published methods of citric acid CRT is limited due to crucial elements of the citric acid CRT protocol being omitted from published manuscripts. These findings have implications on the use of citric acid CRT in clinical and pharmaceutical studies to evaluate the effects of antitussive medications and cough therapies.

Evidence against a subcortical gate preventing conscious detection of respiratory load stimuli

Respiratory related evoked potentials (RREP) were used to examine respiratory stimulus gating. RREPs produced by consciously detected vs. undetected loads, near the detection threshold, were compared. Participants (n = 17) were instrumented with EEG and a nasal mask connected to a loading manifold, which presented a range of mid-inspiratory resistive loads, plus a control, in a random block design. Participants were cued prior to the stimulus and signalled detection by a button press. There were statistically significant differences in peak-to-peak amplitude of the P1 RREP peak for detected (mean ± SD; 3.86 ± 1.45 μV; P =  0.020) and undetected loads (3.67 ± 1.27 μV; P =  0.002) vs. control (2.36 ± 0.81 μV), although baseline-to-peak differences were not significantly different. In contrast peak-to-peak P3 amplitude was significantly greater for detected (5.91 ± 1.54 μV; P <  0.001) but not undetected loads (3.33 ± 0.98 μV; P = 0.189) vs. control (3.69 ± 1.46 μV), with the same pattern observed for baseline-to-peak measurements. The P1 peak, thought to reflect arrival of somatosensory information, appeared to be present in response to both detected and undetected loads, but the later P3 peak, was present for detected loads only. This suggests that for sub-threshold loads sensory information may reach the cortex, arguing against a sub-cortical gating process.