Background Nomophobia has been highly prevalent among health discipline students. However, there is no available data on the prevalence of nomophobia among respiratory therapy (RT) students in Saudi Arabia. Methods A cross-sectional survey using the nomophobia questionnaire (NMP-Q) was conducted and distributed using a convenience sample of RT students through an online platform (Survey Monkey) between September and November 2022. Results Overall, 1428 RT students, with males accounting for 773 (54%), responded to the online survey. The prevalence of nomophobia among RT students was 97.3% (1390). The mean (±SD) of the total NMP-Q items scores was 62 (±22), indicating a moderate level of nomophobia among the RT students. Female RT students had significantly higher nomophobia scores than male RT students (63 (47–80) vs 59 (43–75); p <0.001)). Single RT students had significantly higher nomophobia scores than married RT students (62 (46–78) vs 46 (37–64); p <0.001)). RT students who were living outside the family home had significantly higher nomophobia scores than RT students who were living with their family (66 (54–78) vs 60 (44–77); p = 0.001)). RT students with a GPA of 4.50 to 5.00 had the highest nomophobia score (63 (46–79); p = 0.005)). RT students who were in their third year had the highest nomophobia score (66 (48–80); p <0.001)). RT students who reported no academic warnings had the highest nomophobia score (63 (48–80); p <0.001)). RT students who spent ≥ five hours studying per week had the highest nomophobia score (64 (51–80); p <0.001)). Conclusion Nomophobia is common among RT students, with the majority experiencing a moderate level. Being female, single, living outside the family home, and having a higher academic performance were risk factors associated with higher nomophobia levels.

Granulomatous–lymphocytic interstitial lung disease (GLILD) has been defined as “a distinct clinico-radio-pathological ILD [interstitial lung disease] occurring in patients with CVID [common variable immunodeficiency disorders], associated with a lymphocytic infiltrate and/or granuloma in the lung, and in whom other conditions have been considered and where possible excluded… usually seen in the context of multisystem granulomatous/inflammatory involvement” [1]. The immune and inflammatory complications of CVID such as GLILD are important and associated with reduced survival [2]. However, as a rare manifestation of a rare disease, the scientific understanding and evidence basis to inform effective diagnosis and management of GLILD [3] are limited. There are challenges with the definition of GLILD presented above and the terminology more widely of ILD in people with CVID, which requires further consensus. In this manuscript, we use the term GLILD to describe the heterogeneous ILD seen as part of multisystem immune dysregulation in a substantial minority of people with CVID. A recent international survey of clinicians found little uniformity in diagnostic and therapeutic interventions, identifying an urgent need for new evidence to support consensus guidance [4]. In 2019, the European Respiratory Society (ERS) established a Clinical Research Collaboration to address GLILD (eGLILDnet) [5]. eGLILDnet aims to promote the exchange of research ideas among clinicians and scientists in order to plan, conduct, evaluate and publish clinical and translational studies. Better evidence to diagnose and manage GLILD requires new multicentre research and to this end, we have conducted and here report the results of an international research prioritisation exercise in GLILD. This was a partnership between multiprofessional clinicians and people living with GLILD.

IntroductionCommon variable immunodeficiency related interstitial lung disease (CVID-ILD, also referred to as GLILD) is generally considered a manifestation of systemic immune dysregulation occurring in up to 20% of people with CVID. There is a lack of evidence-based guidelines for the diagnosis and management of CVID-ILD.AimTo systematically review use of diagnostic tests for assessing patients with CVID for possible ILD, and to evaluate their utility and risks.MethodsEMBASE, MEDLINE, PubMed and Cochrane databases were searched. Papers reporting information on the diagnosis of ILD in patients with CVID were included.Results58 studies were included. Radiology was the investigation modality most commonly used. HRCT was the most reported test, as abnormal radiology often first raised suspicion of CVID-ILD. Lung biopsy was used in 42 (72%) of studies, and surgical lung biopsy had more conclusive results compared to trans-bronchial biopsy (TBB). Analysis of broncho-alveolar lavage was reported in 24 (41%) studies, primarily to exclude infection. Pulmonary function tests, most commonly gas transfer, were widely used. However, results varied from normal to severely impaired, typically with a restrictive pattern and reduced gas transfer.ConclusionConsensus diagnostic criteria are urgently required to support accurate assessment and monitoring in CVID-ILD. ESID and the ERS e-GLILDnet CRC have initiated a diagnostic and management guideline through international collaboration.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42022276337.