Chest
-
Multicenter Study Comparative Study Clinical Trial
Patient Engagement Using New Technology to Improve Adherence to Positive Airway Pressure Therapy: A Retrospective Analysis.
Sleep apnea has major neurocognitive and cardiovascular and metabolic risks. Treatment of sleep apnea is suboptimal because of variable adherence to existing therapies. ⋯ Robust therapy adherence rates can be achieved by adding modern technology to usual care. Adopting advances in technology in care management may allow clinicians to more effectively and efficiently treat patients who have sleep apnea. Rigorous randomized controlled trials may be required before making strong clinical recommendations.
-
Every year, millions of patients are diagnosed with pulmonary nodules, and as increasing numbers of people undergo lung cancer screening, even more patients will be found to have a nodule. The vast majority of patients cannot benefit from the detection of a pulmonary nodule because most are benign. Accordingly, it is important to develop strategies to minimize harm, in particular the distress of a "near-cancer" diagnosis. ⋯ We conducted multiple studies to characterize the experience of patients with the diagnosis and evaluation of incidental pulmonary nodules, measure patient-centered outcomes for patients with pulmonary nodules, and determine the association of patient-clinician communication practices with those outcomes. We learned that a substantial proportion of patients experience distress and inadequate communication about pulmonary nodules and their evaluation, and yet many clinicians are unaware of the degree to which some patients are affected by the finding of a pulmonary nodule. The present review provides a comprehensive summary of our results and offers suggestions for how clinicians can best provide high-quality communication for their patients.
-
Practice Guideline
Screening for Lung Cancer: CHEST Guideline and Expert Panel Report.
Low-dose chest CT screening for lung cancer has become a standard of care in the United States in the past few years, in large part due to the results of the National Lung Screening Trial. The benefit and harms of low-dose chest CT screening differ in both frequency and magnitude. The translation of a favorable balance of benefit and harms into practice can be difficult. Here, we update the evidence base for the benefit, harms, and implementation of low radiation dose chest CT screening. We use the updated evidence base to provide recommendations where the evidence allows, and statements based on experience and expert consensus where it does not. ⋯ Evidence suggests that low-dose CT screening for lung cancer results in a favorable but tenuous balance of benefit and harms. The selection of screen-eligible patients, the quality of imaging and image interpretation, the management of screen-detected findings, and the effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions can affect this balance. Additional research is needed to optimize the approach to low-dose CT screening.
-
A 52-year-old white woman and her 61-year-old white brother separately presented with gradually worsening dyspnea on exertion and cough, and evidence of interstitial lung disease on chest imaging.
-
The collapsibility index of the inferior vena cava is traditionally visualized from the subcostal region in the sagittal plane, referred to here as cIVCSS. Alternatively, the collapsibility index of the inferior vena cava can be visualized from the right midaxillary line in the coronal plane, referred to here as cIVCRC. It is unclear whether values of cIVCRC are comparable with values of cIVCSS because the inferior vena cava collapses asymmetrically into an elliptical form, quantified as the flat ratio of the inferior vena cava (F-IVC). This study aimed (1) to establish if cIVCRC is concordant or discordant to cIVCSS, and (2) to describe how this concordance or discordance is related to F-IVC. ⋯ cIVCRC and cIVCSS measures are discordant, where cIVCRC underestimates cIVCSS. The degree of discordance is directly proportional to the value of F-IVC. Therefore, we recommend that cIVCRC ≥ 42% be used to rule in, but not to rule out, fluid responsivity. Wherever possible, F-IVC should be assessed to understand the clinical relevance of cIVCRC.