Background The COVID-19 pandemic is having profound psychological impacts on populations globally, with increasing levels of stress, anxiety, and depression being reported, especially in people with pre-existing medical conditions who appear to be particularly vulnerable. There are limited data on the specific concerns people have about COVID-19 and what these are based on. Methods The aim of this study was to identify and explore the concerns of people with long-term respiratory conditions in the UK regarding the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and how these concerns were affecting them. We conducted a thematic analysis of free text responses to the question “What are your main concerns about getting coronavirus?”, which was included in the British Lung Foundation/Asthma UK (BLF-AUK) partnership COVID-19 survey, conducted between the 1st and 8th of April 2020. This was during the 3rd week of the UK’s initial ‘social distancing measures’ which included advice to stay at home and only go outside for specific limited reasons. Results 7039 responses were analysed, with respondents from a wide range of age groups (under 17 to over 80), gender, and all UK nations. Respondents reported having asthma (85%), COPD (9%), bronchiectasis (4%), interstitial lung disease (2%), or ‘other’ lung diseases (e.g. lung cancer) (1%). Four main themes were identified: (1) vulnerability to COVID-19; (2) anticipated experience of contracting COVID-19; (3) pervasive uncertainty; and (4) inadequate national response. Conclusions The COVID-19 pandemic is having profound psychological impacts. The concerns we identified largely reflect contextual factors, as well as their subjective experience of the current situation. Hence, key approaches to reducing these concerns require changes to the reality of their situation, and are likely to include (1) helping people optimise their health, limit risk of infection, and access necessities; (2) minimising the negative experience of disease where possible, (3) providing up-to-date, accurate and consistent information, (4) improving the government and healthcare response.

IntroductionUK guidelines suggest that pulse oximetry, rather than blood gas sampling, is adequate for monitoring of patients with COVID-19 if CO2 retention is not suspected. However, pulse oximetry has impaired accuracy in certain patient groups, and data are lacking on its accuracy in patients with COVID-19 stepping down from intensive care unit (ICU) to non-ICU settings or being transferred to another ICU.MethodsWe assessed the bias, precision and limits of agreement using 90 paired SpO2 and SaO2 from 30 patients (3 paired samples per patient). To assess the agreement between pulse oximetry (SpO2) and arterial blood gas analysis (SaO2) in patients with COVID-19, deemed clinically stable to step down from an ICU to a non-ICU ward, or be transferred to another ICU. This was done to evaluate whether the guidelines were appropriate for our setting.ResultsMean difference between SaO2 and SpO2 (bias) was 0.4%, with an SD of 2.4 (precision). The limits of agreement between SpO2 and SaO2 were as follows: upper limit of 5.2% (95% CI 6.5% to 4.2%) and lower limit of −4.3% (95% CI −3.4% to −5.7%).ConclusionsIn our setting, pulse oximetry showed a level of agreement with SaO2 measurement that was slightly suboptimal, although within acceptable levels for Food and Drug Authority approval, in people with COVID-19 judged clinically ready to step down from ICU to a non-ICU ward, or who were being transferred to another hospital’s ICU. In such patients, SpO2 should be interpreted with caution. Arterial blood gas assessment of SaO2 may still be clinically indicated.

BACKGROUND The COVID-19 pandemic is having profound psychological impacts on populations globally, with increasing levels of stress, anxiety, and depression being reported, especially in people with pre-existing medical conditions who appear to be particularly vulnerable. There are limited data on the specific concerns people have about COVID-19 and what these are based on. METHODS The aim of this study was to identify and explore the concerns of people with long-term respiratory conditions in the UK regarding the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and how these concerns were affecting them. We conducted a thematic analysis of free text responses to the question 'What are your main concerns about getting coronavirus?', which was included in the British Lung Foundation/Asthma UK (BLF-AUK) partnership COVID-19 survey, conducted between the 1st and 8th of April. This was during the 3rd week of the UK's initial social distancing measures. RESULTS 7,039 responses were analysed, with respondents from a wide range of ages, gender, and all UK nations. Respondents reported having asthma (85%), COPD (9%), bronchiectasis (4%), interstitial lung disease (2%), or 'other' lung diseases (e.g. lung cancer) (1%). Four main themes were identified: 1) vulnerability to COVID-19; 2) anticipated experience of contracting COVID-19; 3) wide-reaching uncertainty; and 4) inadequate national response. CONCLUSIONS The COVID-19 pandemic is having profound psychological impacts. The concerns we identified largely reflect objective, as well as subjective, aspects of the current situation. Hence, key approaches to reducing these concerns require changes to the reality of their situation, and are likely to include i) helping people optimise their health, limit risk of infection, and access necessities; ii) minimising the negative experience of disease where possible, iii) providing up-to-date, accurate and consistent information, iv) improving the government and healthcare response.

An 86-year-old female presented to the Emergency Department (ED) in respiratory distress after choking on a sandwich at home. Her family had noticed that she had had difficulty during and coughing after swallowing for several months. Her initial chest x-ray showed diffuse alveolar infiltrates in both lungs and blood tests showed normal white cells and C-Reactive Protein (CRP). She was started on intravenous antibiotics for presumed aspiration pneumonia and received 15 L of oxygen. However, the infiltration had dramatically improved, both radiologically and clinically, within 24 hours. She was diagnosed with negative pressure pulmonary oedema (NPPE) type 1 and made a rapid recovery. The Speech and Language Team diagnosed an impaired swallow and advised soft or bite-sized suitable foods. We discussed the ongoing risk of aspiration and long-term feeding options with the patient’s family. We agreed on a conservative plan for ‘risk feeding’, given her frailty and co-morbidities, and began discussions on ceilings of care. This case aims to raise awareness of NPPE so that it can be diagnosed, investigated and treated promptly. Although seen most commonly by intensivists and anaesthetists, it is relevant to those on the acute medical take and geriatricians managing patients with swallowing difficulties.

No abstract