Szymon Skoczyński1, Jan Zejda2, Grzegorz Brożek2, Klaudia Glinka3, Sylwia Waz4, Beata Kotulska4, Adam Barczyk4. 1. Department of Pneumonology in Katowice, School of Medicine in Katowice, Medical University of Silesia, Katowice, Poland. Electronic address: simon.mds@poczta.fm. 2. Department of Epidemiology, School of Medicine in Katowice, Medical University of Silesia, Katowice, Poland. 3. Department of Pneumonology in Katowice, School of Medicine in Katowice, Medical University of Silesia, Katowice, Poland; Department of Epidemiology, School of Medicine in Katowice, Medical University of Silesia, Katowice, Poland. 4. Department of Pneumonology in Katowice, School of Medicine in Katowice, Medical University of Silesia, Katowice, Poland.
Abstract
PURPOSE: There is an increasing amount of data regarding the influence of sex on dyspnea perception, however, the influence of sex has not been included in clinical guidelines for asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study included 123 clinically stable subjects. Seventy five patients had COPD, of which 70.6% were men and 29.4% were women. Forty-eight subjects had asthma, comprised of 45.8% and 54.2%, men and women, respectively. Dyspnea was assessed with the use of modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) Visual Analogue Scale VAS, and BORG scale. All patients underwent spirometry with a broncho-reversibility test. RESULTS: There were no differences in age for neither asthma patients, 56.5 ± 11.6 and 55.0 ± 12.7 (p = 0.5) for males and females, nor for COPD patients, 66.8 ± 9.0 and 66.8 ± 7.7 (p = 0.7) for males and females, respectively. Asthmatic females had more dyspnea than males when assessed with VAS, 1.85 ± 2.24 and 3.84 ± 2.80 (p = 0.01), for males and females, respectively. When assessed with BORGpre 6-MWT, dyspnea results were 0.86 ± 1.83 and 2.43 ± 2.31 (p = 0.005), for males and females, respectively. In the whole group, apart from FEV1 (for mMRC, VAS, BORGpre) and BMI (BORGpost) the severity of dyspnea was related to female sex when assessed with mMRC (OR=2.83; 95%CI: 1.25-6.42) and VAS (OR = 2.17; 95%CI:1.00-4.73). CONCLUSIONS: Although more apparent in asthma, it was revealed for the first time, that sex has a strong influence on the magnitude of dyspnea perception, both in asthma and COPD. Therefore, sex related dyspnea sensation should probably be included in clinical assessment and patient treatment.
PURPOSE: There is an increasing amount of data regarding the influence of sex on dyspnea perception, however, the influence of sex has not been included in clinical guidelines for asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study included 123 clinically stable subjects. Seventy five patients had COPD, of which 70.6% were men and 29.4% were women. Forty-eight subjects had asthma, comprised of 45.8% and 54.2%, men and women, respectively. Dyspnea was assessed with the use of modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) Visual Analogue Scale VAS, and BORG scale. All patients underwent spirometry with a broncho-reversibility test. RESULTS: There were no differences in age for neither asthmapatients, 56.5 ± 11.6 and 55.0 ± 12.7 (p = 0.5) for males and females, nor for COPDpatients, 66.8 ± 9.0 and 66.8 ± 7.7 (p = 0.7) for males and females, respectively. Asthmatic females had more dyspnea than males when assessed with VAS, 1.85 ± 2.24 and 3.84 ± 2.80 (p = 0.01), for males and females, respectively. When assessed with BORGpre 6-MWT, dyspnea results were 0.86 ± 1.83 and 2.43 ± 2.31 (p = 0.005), for males and females, respectively. In the whole group, apart from FEV1 (for mMRC, VAS, BORGpre) and BMI (BORGpost) the severity of dyspnea was related to female sex when assessed with mMRC (OR=2.83; 95%CI: 1.25-6.42) and VAS (OR = 2.17; 95%CI:1.00-4.73). CONCLUSIONS: Although more apparent in asthma, it was revealed for the first time, that sex has a strong influence on the magnitude of dyspnea perception, both in asthma and COPD. Therefore, sex related dyspnea sensation should probably be included in clinical assessment and patient treatment.
Authors: Michelle Spek; Roderick Venekamp; Esther De Groot; Geert-Jan Geersing; Daphne Carmen Erkelens; Maarten van Smeden; Frans H Rutten; Dorien L Zwart Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2022-04-21 Impact factor: 3.006
Authors: Elena Ioana Iconaru; Manuela Mihaela Ciucurel; Luminita Georgescu; Mariana Tudor; Monica Marilena Tantu; Constantin Ciucurel Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-04-12 Impact factor: 4.614