Isabell Anna Just1,2, Felix Schoenrath1,2, Philipp Passinger1, Julia Stein3, Dagmar Kemper1, Christoph Knosalla1,2,4, Volkmar Falk1,2,4,5, Jan Knierim1. 1. Department of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Surgery, German Heart Center Berlin, Berlin, Germany. 2. DZHK (German Centre for Cardiovascular Research), Partner Site Berlin, Berlin, Germany. 3. Dienstleistungs GmbH, German Heart Center Berlin, Berlin, Germany. 4. Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany. 5. Department of Health Sciences and Technology, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The 6-minute walk test (6MWT), as a clinical assessment tool for functional exercise capacity, is an integral component of lung allocation scores (LASs). In times of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, patients underwent 6MWTs wearing a surgical mask in ambulatory care. We investigated the impact of wearing a mask on 6-minute walk distances (6MWDs). METHOD: 6MWDs of 64 patients with end-stage lung diseases wearing an oronasal surgical mask were retrospectively compared to previously investigated 6MWDs of the same cohort, in a pre-COVID-19 pandemic era, without wearing a mask. Four patients were excluded due to a primary vascular disease, 29 patients due to clinically unstable pulmonary functions, and 1 patient due to a psychiatric disorder. RESULTS: The median age of the patients included was 55 (46-58) years; 15 (48%) were male. Ten (32.2%) were on the Eurotransplant lung transplant waiting list with a median LAS of 34.3 (31.9-36.2). Twenty (64.5%) patients had chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases, 7 (22.6%) had interstitial lung diseases, and 4 (12.9%) had other end-stage lung diseases. The mean 6MWD without versus with wearing a mask was 306.9 (101.9) versus 305.7 (103.8) m, with a mean difference of -1.19 m (95% confidence interval -13.4 to 11.03). The observed difference is statistically equivalent to zero (p < 0.001). No significant differences in 6MWDs were observed between the clinical groups. CONCLUSION: Wearing an oronasal surgical mask did not affect the 6MWDs of patients with advanced lung diseases. Therefore, a masked 6MWT appears to provide a reliable examination of functional exercise capacity in this cohort.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The 6-minute walk test (6MWT), as a clinical assessment tool for functional exercise capacity, is an integral component of lung allocation scores (LASs). In times of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, patients underwent 6MWTs wearing a surgical mask in ambulatory care. We investigated the impact of wearing a mask on 6-minute walk distances (6MWDs). METHOD: 6MWDs of 64 patients with end-stage lung diseases wearing an oronasal surgical mask were retrospectively compared to previously investigated 6MWDs of the same cohort, in a pre-COVID-19 pandemic era, without wearing a mask. Four patients were excluded due to a primary vascular disease, 29 patients due to clinically unstable pulmonary functions, and 1 patient due to a psychiatric disorder. RESULTS: The median age of the patients included was 55 (46-58) years; 15 (48%) were male. Ten (32.2%) were on the Eurotransplant lung transplant waiting list with a median LAS of 34.3 (31.9-36.2). Twenty (64.5%) patients had chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases, 7 (22.6%) had interstitial lung diseases, and 4 (12.9%) had other end-stage lung diseases. The mean 6MWD without versus with wearing a mask was 306.9 (101.9) versus 305.7 (103.8) m, with a mean difference of -1.19 m (95% confidence interval -13.4 to 11.03). The observed difference is statistically equivalent to zero (p < 0.001). No significant differences in 6MWDs were observed between the clinical groups. CONCLUSION: Wearing an oronasal surgical mask did not affect the 6MWDs of patients with advanced lung diseases. Therefore, a masked 6MWT appears to provide a reliable examination of functional exercise capacity in this cohort.
Authors: Grace Vogt; Kimberley Radtke; Andrew Jagim; Dominique Peckumn; Teresa Lee; Richard Mikat; Carl Foster Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-10-08 Impact factor: 4.614
Authors: Brigitte M Borg; Christian Osadnik; Keith Adam; David G Chapman; Catherine E Farrow; Vanda Glavas; Kerry Hancock; Celia J Lanteri; Ewan G Morris; Nicholas Romeo; Elena K Schneider-Futschik; Hiran Selvadurai Journal: Respirology Date: 2022-08-10 Impact factor: 6.175