Wearing face masks while climbing stairs influences respiratory physiology

BACKGROUND

During the COVID-19 pandemic wearing face masks was mandatory. Nowadays, face masks are still encouraged indoors, especially in hospitals. People climbing stairs with masks describe unpredictable dyspnea.

METHODS

Healthy adults climbed 5 floors with and without a mask. Various cardio-respiratory parameters were measured, including O2-Saturation (O2-Sat) and End-tidal CO2 (EtCO2), at baseline and on the top floor. Subjective indexes, such as Borg's scale, were evaluated.

RESULTS

Thirty-two volunteers (16 males), median age 39 years (IQR 32.5-43), median BMI=23.6 (IQR 21.5-25.1), with good fitness levels, participated. Comparing baseline to end-activity, median (IQR): O2-Sat change was -1.0% (-2-0) without mask, versus -3.0% (-4-0) with mask, p=0.003; EtCO2 +7.0 (+3.3-+9) without mask, versus +8.0 (+6 -+12) with mask, p=0.0001. Hypercarbia was seen in 5 (15.6%) participants without mask, median=48mmHg (IQR 47.5-51), and in 11 (34%) participants with mask, median=50mmHg (IQR 47-54), p<0.001. Desaturation (O2-Sat<95%) was seen in 5 (15.6%) participants without mask, median=94% (IQR 93-94%), and in 10 (31%) participants with mask, median=91.5% (IQR 90-93%), p=0.06. Regression analysis demonstrated that only male sex was significantly associated with abnormal EtCO2 (OR=26.4, 95%CI=1.9-366.4, p=0.005). Ascent duration increased from median (IQR) of 94 seconds (86-100) without mask to 98 seconds (89-107) with mask, p<0.001. Borg's scale of perceived exertion (range 0-10) increased from median (IQR) of 3.0 (2.5-3.87) without mask to 4.0 (3.0-4.37) with mask, p<0.001.

CONCLUSIONS

During routine daily activities, such as stair-climbing, face masks cause dyspnea, and have measurable influences on ventilation, including true desaturation and hypercapnia, especially in males.

High SARC-F score predicts poor survival of patients with cancer receiving palliative care

PURPOSE

A high score determined by SARC-F, a simple screening questionnaire for sarcopenia, has been reportedly associated with worse medical outcomes. However, information regarding whether high SARC-F scores are associated with a poor prognosis in patients with advanced cancer remains limited. We clarified whether a SARC-F score ≥ 4 predicts poor prognosis in patients with cancer receiving palliative care.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients with cancer who received palliative care at a university hospital between May 2019 and April 2020. Patient characteristics including age, sex, height, weight, cancer type, serum albumin level, C-reactive protein level, presence of edema, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group-Performance Status (ECOG-PS), SARC-F score, history of anticancer therapy, and clinical outcomes were collected from electronic medical records.

RESULTS

Of 304 patients, 188 had a SARC-F score < 4, and 116 patients had a SARC-F score ≥ 4. The overall survival of patients with a SARC-F score ≥ 4 was 40 days (95% CI 29-47), which was significantly worse than 121 days (95% CI 95-156) for patients with a SARC-F score < 4 (p < 0.001). SARC-F score ≥ 4 (hazard ratio: HR 1.56), edema (HR 1.94), head and neck cancer (HR 0.51), C-reactive protein (HR 1.05), ECOG-PS ≥ 3 (HR 1.47), and radiotherapy (HR 0.52) were associated with overall survival. The ability to climb stairs was a SARC-F sub-item significantly associated with mortality (HR 1.59).

CONCLUSION

The SARC-F questionnaire is a useful predictor of prognosis for patients with cancer receiving palliative care because a SARC-F ≥ 4 score predicts worse overall survival.

Criterion-related validity of self-reported stair climbing in older adults

INTRODUCTION

Stair climbing is an activity of daily living that might contribute to increase levels of physical activity (PA). To date, there is no study examining the validity of climbing stairs assessed by self-report. The aim of this study was, therefore, to examine the validity of estimated stair climbing from one question included in a common questionnaire compared to a pattern-recognition activity monitor in older adults.

METHODS

A total of 138 older adults (94 women), aged 65-86 years (70.9 ± 4.7 years), from the IMPACT65 + study participated in this validity study. Estimates of stair climbing were obtained from the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) PA questionnaire. An objective assessment of stair climbing was obtained with the Intelligent Device for Energy Expenditure and Activity (IDEEA) monitor.

RESULTS

The correlation between both methods to assess stair climbing was fair (ρ = 0.22, p = 0.008 for PA energy expenditure and ρ = 0.26, p = 0.002 for duration). Mean differences between self-report and the IDEEA were 7.96 ± 10.52 vs. 9.88 ± 3.32 METs-min/day for PA energy expenditure, and 0.99 ± 1.32 vs. 1.79 ± 2.02 min/day for duration (both Wilcoxon test p < 0.001). Results from the Bland-Altman analysis indicate that bias between both instruments were -1.91 ± 10.30 METs-min/day and -0.80 ± 1.99 min/day, and corresponding limits of agreement for the two instruments were from 18.27 to -22.10 METs-min/day and from 3.09 to -4.70 min/day, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Our results indicate that self-reported stair climbing has modest validity to accurately rank old age participants, and underestimates both PAEE and its duration, as compared with an objectively measured method.