User login
RBC transfusion guidelines in critical care: Making the case for a restrictive approach
In the high-stakes environment of the intensive care unit (ICU), red blood cell (RBC) transfusions are a common intervention. With approximately 25% of critically ill patients in the US receiving RBC transfusions, optimizing the approach to transfusion is vital not only for patient safety but also for resource management. For the bedside clinician and health care systems, this presents both an opportunity and a challenge: to recalibrate transfusion practices while maintaining the highest standards of patient care.
Why a restrictive strategy?
Historically, transfusions were administered to optimize oxygen delivery to organs in the presence of anemia. However, studies have highlighted the risks associated with transfusions, such as transfusion-related lung injury, circulatory overload, and increased nosocomial infections. These risks are particularly pronounced in critically ill patients, who are often more vulnerable to complications from any additional physiological burden.
The restrictive approach—typically recommended at a hemoglobin threshold of 7 to 8 g/dL—has been shown to be the safer alternative for most ICU patients, as highlighted in recently published clinical guidelines. The data supporting this approach suggest that a restrictive transfusion strategy not only spares patients unnecessary transfusions but also aligns with cost-effective and resource-efficient health care practices.
Key recommendations
For ICU providers, this guideline presents specific recommendations based on a patient’s condition:
• General critical illness: The restrictive approach is preferred over a permissive one, with no adverse effect on ICU mortality, one-year survival, or adverse events. In other words, lower Hgb thresholds do not correlate with poorer outcomes in most critically ill patients.
• Acute gastrointestinal bleeding: Evidence favors a restrictive approach, associated with reduced rebleeding risk and short-term mortality. Studies show a significantly lower incidence of transfusion reactions and costs without compromising patient safety.
• Acute coronary syndrome (ACS): A more cautious approach is advised here. In cases of ACS, a restrictive RBC transfusion strategy could potentially increase the risk of cardiac death. It is recommended to avoid a restrictive approach, as it remains unclear whether there is a gradient effect—where risk progressively increases below a hemoglobin level of 10 g/dL—or a threshold effect at 10 g/dL. In other words, the data does not clarify if a hemoglobin level of 9 g/dL is as safe as 10 g/dL. An individualized transfusion approach, considering patient symptoms and other physiological markers, is recommended.
• Post-cardiac surgery: For postoperative patients, a restrictive strategy is suggested, as it conserves RBCs without impacting outcomes such as mortality or length of hospital stay.
• Isolated troponin elevation: In cases of elevated troponin without evidence of cardiac ischemia, transfusion decisions should consider additional patient-specific variables, with a restrictive approach as the baseline.
• Septic shock: RBC transfusions as part of a resuscitation bundle were not analyzed, as isolating the impact of RBC transfusions from other bundle elements was not feasible. However, with no clear benefit and similar adverse effects, neither strategy proved clinically superior. Nonetheless, a restrictive approach conserves RBC units, thereby saving resources and reducing costs.
The economics of restriction
Beyond clinical benefits, a restrictive approach conserves precious health care resources. With the cost of a single RBC unit hovering around $200—and significantly higher once administrative and logistic expenses are accounted for—reducing unnecessary transfusions translates into substantial savings. For a health care system already strained by limited blood supply and rising demand, a 40% reduction in transfusions across ICUs could alleviate supply pressures and contribute to more equitable resource distribution.
Easier said than done
Adopting a restrictive transfusion policy is not without challenges. Clinicians are trained to act decisively in critical situations, and, often, the instinct is to do more rather than less. However, studies indicate that with proper education, awareness, and decision-support systems, a restrictive policy is both feasible and effective. Institutions may consider behavior modification strategies, such as standardized transfusion order sets and decision-support tools within electronic medical records, to aid in adjusting transfusion practices.
Call to action
The message is clear: For most critically ill patients, a restrictive RBC transfusion strategy is not only safe but optimal. For ICU teams, this calls for a proactive shift in approach. It is a call to scrutinize transfusion triggers and lean toward a judicious, evidence-based approach.
While cases like ACS may require a different approach, the evidence strongly supports that, under most circumstances, less is more. Embracing this approach requires careful consideration, yet the potential benefits for patient safety and health care sustainability are compelling.
As critical care professionals, let us lead the way in refining transfusion practices to uphold patient safety, optimize resources, and adapt to evidence-based guidelines.
ACCESS THE FULL GUIDELINE
In the high-stakes environment of the intensive care unit (ICU), red blood cell (RBC) transfusions are a common intervention. With approximately 25% of critically ill patients in the US receiving RBC transfusions, optimizing the approach to transfusion is vital not only for patient safety but also for resource management. For the bedside clinician and health care systems, this presents both an opportunity and a challenge: to recalibrate transfusion practices while maintaining the highest standards of patient care.
Why a restrictive strategy?
Historically, transfusions were administered to optimize oxygen delivery to organs in the presence of anemia. However, studies have highlighted the risks associated with transfusions, such as transfusion-related lung injury, circulatory overload, and increased nosocomial infections. These risks are particularly pronounced in critically ill patients, who are often more vulnerable to complications from any additional physiological burden.
The restrictive approach—typically recommended at a hemoglobin threshold of 7 to 8 g/dL—has been shown to be the safer alternative for most ICU patients, as highlighted in recently published clinical guidelines. The data supporting this approach suggest that a restrictive transfusion strategy not only spares patients unnecessary transfusions but also aligns with cost-effective and resource-efficient health care practices.
Key recommendations
For ICU providers, this guideline presents specific recommendations based on a patient’s condition:
• General critical illness: The restrictive approach is preferred over a permissive one, with no adverse effect on ICU mortality, one-year survival, or adverse events. In other words, lower Hgb thresholds do not correlate with poorer outcomes in most critically ill patients.
• Acute gastrointestinal bleeding: Evidence favors a restrictive approach, associated with reduced rebleeding risk and short-term mortality. Studies show a significantly lower incidence of transfusion reactions and costs without compromising patient safety.
• Acute coronary syndrome (ACS): A more cautious approach is advised here. In cases of ACS, a restrictive RBC transfusion strategy could potentially increase the risk of cardiac death. It is recommended to avoid a restrictive approach, as it remains unclear whether there is a gradient effect—where risk progressively increases below a hemoglobin level of 10 g/dL—or a threshold effect at 10 g/dL. In other words, the data does not clarify if a hemoglobin level of 9 g/dL is as safe as 10 g/dL. An individualized transfusion approach, considering patient symptoms and other physiological markers, is recommended.
• Post-cardiac surgery: For postoperative patients, a restrictive strategy is suggested, as it conserves RBCs without impacting outcomes such as mortality or length of hospital stay.
• Isolated troponin elevation: In cases of elevated troponin without evidence of cardiac ischemia, transfusion decisions should consider additional patient-specific variables, with a restrictive approach as the baseline.
• Septic shock: RBC transfusions as part of a resuscitation bundle were not analyzed, as isolating the impact of RBC transfusions from other bundle elements was not feasible. However, with no clear benefit and similar adverse effects, neither strategy proved clinically superior. Nonetheless, a restrictive approach conserves RBC units, thereby saving resources and reducing costs.
The economics of restriction
Beyond clinical benefits, a restrictive approach conserves precious health care resources. With the cost of a single RBC unit hovering around $200—and significantly higher once administrative and logistic expenses are accounted for—reducing unnecessary transfusions translates into substantial savings. For a health care system already strained by limited blood supply and rising demand, a 40% reduction in transfusions across ICUs could alleviate supply pressures and contribute to more equitable resource distribution.
Easier said than done
Adopting a restrictive transfusion policy is not without challenges. Clinicians are trained to act decisively in critical situations, and, often, the instinct is to do more rather than less. However, studies indicate that with proper education, awareness, and decision-support systems, a restrictive policy is both feasible and effective. Institutions may consider behavior modification strategies, such as standardized transfusion order sets and decision-support tools within electronic medical records, to aid in adjusting transfusion practices.
Call to action
The message is clear: For most critically ill patients, a restrictive RBC transfusion strategy is not only safe but optimal. For ICU teams, this calls for a proactive shift in approach. It is a call to scrutinize transfusion triggers and lean toward a judicious, evidence-based approach.
While cases like ACS may require a different approach, the evidence strongly supports that, under most circumstances, less is more. Embracing this approach requires careful consideration, yet the potential benefits for patient safety and health care sustainability are compelling.
As critical care professionals, let us lead the way in refining transfusion practices to uphold patient safety, optimize resources, and adapt to evidence-based guidelines.
ACCESS THE FULL GUIDELINE
In the high-stakes environment of the intensive care unit (ICU), red blood cell (RBC) transfusions are a common intervention. With approximately 25% of critically ill patients in the US receiving RBC transfusions, optimizing the approach to transfusion is vital not only for patient safety but also for resource management. For the bedside clinician and health care systems, this presents both an opportunity and a challenge: to recalibrate transfusion practices while maintaining the highest standards of patient care.
Why a restrictive strategy?
Historically, transfusions were administered to optimize oxygen delivery to organs in the presence of anemia. However, studies have highlighted the risks associated with transfusions, such as transfusion-related lung injury, circulatory overload, and increased nosocomial infections. These risks are particularly pronounced in critically ill patients, who are often more vulnerable to complications from any additional physiological burden.
The restrictive approach—typically recommended at a hemoglobin threshold of 7 to 8 g/dL—has been shown to be the safer alternative for most ICU patients, as highlighted in recently published clinical guidelines. The data supporting this approach suggest that a restrictive transfusion strategy not only spares patients unnecessary transfusions but also aligns with cost-effective and resource-efficient health care practices.
Key recommendations
For ICU providers, this guideline presents specific recommendations based on a patient’s condition:
• General critical illness: The restrictive approach is preferred over a permissive one, with no adverse effect on ICU mortality, one-year survival, or adverse events. In other words, lower Hgb thresholds do not correlate with poorer outcomes in most critically ill patients.
• Acute gastrointestinal bleeding: Evidence favors a restrictive approach, associated with reduced rebleeding risk and short-term mortality. Studies show a significantly lower incidence of transfusion reactions and costs without compromising patient safety.
• Acute coronary syndrome (ACS): A more cautious approach is advised here. In cases of ACS, a restrictive RBC transfusion strategy could potentially increase the risk of cardiac death. It is recommended to avoid a restrictive approach, as it remains unclear whether there is a gradient effect—where risk progressively increases below a hemoglobin level of 10 g/dL—or a threshold effect at 10 g/dL. In other words, the data does not clarify if a hemoglobin level of 9 g/dL is as safe as 10 g/dL. An individualized transfusion approach, considering patient symptoms and other physiological markers, is recommended.
• Post-cardiac surgery: For postoperative patients, a restrictive strategy is suggested, as it conserves RBCs without impacting outcomes such as mortality or length of hospital stay.
• Isolated troponin elevation: In cases of elevated troponin without evidence of cardiac ischemia, transfusion decisions should consider additional patient-specific variables, with a restrictive approach as the baseline.
• Septic shock: RBC transfusions as part of a resuscitation bundle were not analyzed, as isolating the impact of RBC transfusions from other bundle elements was not feasible. However, with no clear benefit and similar adverse effects, neither strategy proved clinically superior. Nonetheless, a restrictive approach conserves RBC units, thereby saving resources and reducing costs.
The economics of restriction
Beyond clinical benefits, a restrictive approach conserves precious health care resources. With the cost of a single RBC unit hovering around $200—and significantly higher once administrative and logistic expenses are accounted for—reducing unnecessary transfusions translates into substantial savings. For a health care system already strained by limited blood supply and rising demand, a 40% reduction in transfusions across ICUs could alleviate supply pressures and contribute to more equitable resource distribution.
Easier said than done
Adopting a restrictive transfusion policy is not without challenges. Clinicians are trained to act decisively in critical situations, and, often, the instinct is to do more rather than less. However, studies indicate that with proper education, awareness, and decision-support systems, a restrictive policy is both feasible and effective. Institutions may consider behavior modification strategies, such as standardized transfusion order sets and decision-support tools within electronic medical records, to aid in adjusting transfusion practices.
Call to action
The message is clear: For most critically ill patients, a restrictive RBC transfusion strategy is not only safe but optimal. For ICU teams, this calls for a proactive shift in approach. It is a call to scrutinize transfusion triggers and lean toward a judicious, evidence-based approach.
While cases like ACS may require a different approach, the evidence strongly supports that, under most circumstances, less is more. Embracing this approach requires careful consideration, yet the potential benefits for patient safety and health care sustainability are compelling.
As critical care professionals, let us lead the way in refining transfusion practices to uphold patient safety, optimize resources, and adapt to evidence-based guidelines.
ACCESS THE FULL GUIDELINE
DDSEP Plus Can Help You Achieve Your Educational Goals
Challenge yourself with these practice questions! This is just a sample of the nearly 900 questions available with an annual DDSEP Plus subscription. AGA member trainees receive a discounted subscription.
Purchase a subscription to continue learning.
Practice Question #1
A 45-year-old woman diagnosed with irritable bowel syndrome with diarrhea presents to your clinic. Her diarrhea is well controlled with loperamide, but her abdominal pain persists.
Her primary care provider previously prescribed dicyclomine, but this did not improve her abdominal pain symptoms.
What is the next best medication to treat her abdominal pain?
A. Amitriptyline
B. Codeine/acetaminophen
C. Hydrocodone
D. Meloxicam
Correct answer:
A. Amitriptyline
Commentary:
Amitriptyline is a tricyclic antidepressant medication that functions as a central neuromodulator. A systematic review of randomized controlled trials of 6-12 weeks’ duration showed a modest improvement in global symptom relief and abdominal pain in patients with IBS treated with tricyclic anti-depressants. Opioid medications and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory medications are not recommended to treat abdominal pain in patients with IBS.
Practice Question #2
A 52-year-old man with hypertension and diabetes mellitus type 2 is referred to you for 8 months of troublesome regurgitation and heartburn. He has a body mass index of 29 kg/m2.
He had minimal relief with single-dose proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy before breakfast and partial response with double-dose PPI therapy taken before breakfast and before dinner. Regurgitation after dinner and at bedtime is his most troublesome symptom.
What is the next best step in management?
A. Counsel on weight management
B. Increase PPI to quadruple dose
C. Perform gastric emptying study
D. Refer for bariatric surgery evaluation
E. Switch PPI to before bedtime
Correct answer:
A. Counsel on weight management
Commentary:
This presentation represents typical symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease that are not responsive to an optimized regimen of PPI therapy.
Management of refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease symptoms begins with optimizing lifestyle and weight loss.
Quadruple-dose PPI therapy has no established role. A gastric emptying study would be recommended if gastroparesis was suspected.
This patient does not meet criteria for bariatric surgery as his body mass index is less than 30 kg/m2.
PPI therapy optimization with before-meal dosing (30-60 min before breakfast for single-dose therapy and before breakfast and dinner for double-dose therapy) would be the next step after weight management.
Challenge yourself with these practice questions! This is just a sample of the nearly 900 questions available with an annual DDSEP Plus subscription. AGA member trainees receive a discounted subscription.
Purchase a subscription to continue learning.
Practice Question #1
A 45-year-old woman diagnosed with irritable bowel syndrome with diarrhea presents to your clinic. Her diarrhea is well controlled with loperamide, but her abdominal pain persists.
Her primary care provider previously prescribed dicyclomine, but this did not improve her abdominal pain symptoms.
What is the next best medication to treat her abdominal pain?
A. Amitriptyline
B. Codeine/acetaminophen
C. Hydrocodone
D. Meloxicam
Correct answer:
A. Amitriptyline
Commentary:
Amitriptyline is a tricyclic antidepressant medication that functions as a central neuromodulator. A systematic review of randomized controlled trials of 6-12 weeks’ duration showed a modest improvement in global symptom relief and abdominal pain in patients with IBS treated with tricyclic anti-depressants. Opioid medications and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory medications are not recommended to treat abdominal pain in patients with IBS.
Practice Question #2
A 52-year-old man with hypertension and diabetes mellitus type 2 is referred to you for 8 months of troublesome regurgitation and heartburn. He has a body mass index of 29 kg/m2.
He had minimal relief with single-dose proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy before breakfast and partial response with double-dose PPI therapy taken before breakfast and before dinner. Regurgitation after dinner and at bedtime is his most troublesome symptom.
What is the next best step in management?
A. Counsel on weight management
B. Increase PPI to quadruple dose
C. Perform gastric emptying study
D. Refer for bariatric surgery evaluation
E. Switch PPI to before bedtime
Correct answer:
A. Counsel on weight management
Commentary:
This presentation represents typical symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease that are not responsive to an optimized regimen of PPI therapy.
Management of refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease symptoms begins with optimizing lifestyle and weight loss.
Quadruple-dose PPI therapy has no established role. A gastric emptying study would be recommended if gastroparesis was suspected.
This patient does not meet criteria for bariatric surgery as his body mass index is less than 30 kg/m2.
PPI therapy optimization with before-meal dosing (30-60 min before breakfast for single-dose therapy and before breakfast and dinner for double-dose therapy) would be the next step after weight management.
Challenge yourself with these practice questions! This is just a sample of the nearly 900 questions available with an annual DDSEP Plus subscription. AGA member trainees receive a discounted subscription.
Purchase a subscription to continue learning.
Practice Question #1
A 45-year-old woman diagnosed with irritable bowel syndrome with diarrhea presents to your clinic. Her diarrhea is well controlled with loperamide, but her abdominal pain persists.
Her primary care provider previously prescribed dicyclomine, but this did not improve her abdominal pain symptoms.
What is the next best medication to treat her abdominal pain?
A. Amitriptyline
B. Codeine/acetaminophen
C. Hydrocodone
D. Meloxicam
Correct answer:
A. Amitriptyline
Commentary:
Amitriptyline is a tricyclic antidepressant medication that functions as a central neuromodulator. A systematic review of randomized controlled trials of 6-12 weeks’ duration showed a modest improvement in global symptom relief and abdominal pain in patients with IBS treated with tricyclic anti-depressants. Opioid medications and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory medications are not recommended to treat abdominal pain in patients with IBS.
Practice Question #2
A 52-year-old man with hypertension and diabetes mellitus type 2 is referred to you for 8 months of troublesome regurgitation and heartburn. He has a body mass index of 29 kg/m2.
He had minimal relief with single-dose proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy before breakfast and partial response with double-dose PPI therapy taken before breakfast and before dinner. Regurgitation after dinner and at bedtime is his most troublesome symptom.
What is the next best step in management?
A. Counsel on weight management
B. Increase PPI to quadruple dose
C. Perform gastric emptying study
D. Refer for bariatric surgery evaluation
E. Switch PPI to before bedtime
Correct answer:
A. Counsel on weight management
Commentary:
This presentation represents typical symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease that are not responsive to an optimized regimen of PPI therapy.
Management of refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease symptoms begins with optimizing lifestyle and weight loss.
Quadruple-dose PPI therapy has no established role. A gastric emptying study would be recommended if gastroparesis was suspected.
This patient does not meet criteria for bariatric surgery as his body mass index is less than 30 kg/m2.
PPI therapy optimization with before-meal dosing (30-60 min before breakfast for single-dose therapy and before breakfast and dinner for double-dose therapy) would be the next step after weight management.
AGA Research Foundation: You Can Help
To my fellow AGA Members, I’m not the first to tell you that real progress in the diagnosis, treatment, and cure of digestive disease is at risk. Research funding from traditional sources, like the National Institutes of Health, continues to shrink. We can expect even greater cuts on the horizon.
GI investigators in the early stages of their careers are particularly hard hit. They are finding it much more difficult to secure needed federal funding. As a result, many of these investigators are walking away from GI research frustrated by a lack of support.
It is our hope that physicians have an abundance of new tools and treatments to care for their patients suffering from digestive disorders.
You know that research has revolutionized the care of many digestive disease patients. These patients, as well as everyone in the GI field clinicians and researchers alike, have benefited from the discoveries of passionate investigators, past and present.
This is where you can help.
New treatments and devices are the result of years of research. The AGA Research Foundation grants are critical to continuing the GI pipeline.
Help us fund more researchers by supporting the AGA Research Foundation with a year-end donation. Your donation will support young investigators’ research careers and help assure research is continued.
Be gracious, generous and giving to the future of the GI specialty this holiday season. There are three easy ways to give:
Make a tax-deductible donation online at www. foundation.gastro.org.
Send a donation through the mail to:
AGA Research Foundation
4930 Del Ray Avenue
Bethesda, MD 20814
Or donate over the phone by calling (301) 222-4002. All gifts are tax-deductible to the fullest extent of US law. Join us!
Dr. Camilleri is AGA Research Foundation Chair and Past AGA Institute President. He is a consultant in the Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
To my fellow AGA Members, I’m not the first to tell you that real progress in the diagnosis, treatment, and cure of digestive disease is at risk. Research funding from traditional sources, like the National Institutes of Health, continues to shrink. We can expect even greater cuts on the horizon.
GI investigators in the early stages of their careers are particularly hard hit. They are finding it much more difficult to secure needed federal funding. As a result, many of these investigators are walking away from GI research frustrated by a lack of support.
It is our hope that physicians have an abundance of new tools and treatments to care for their patients suffering from digestive disorders.
You know that research has revolutionized the care of many digestive disease patients. These patients, as well as everyone in the GI field clinicians and researchers alike, have benefited from the discoveries of passionate investigators, past and present.
This is where you can help.
New treatments and devices are the result of years of research. The AGA Research Foundation grants are critical to continuing the GI pipeline.
Help us fund more researchers by supporting the AGA Research Foundation with a year-end donation. Your donation will support young investigators’ research careers and help assure research is continued.
Be gracious, generous and giving to the future of the GI specialty this holiday season. There are three easy ways to give:
Make a tax-deductible donation online at www. foundation.gastro.org.
Send a donation through the mail to:
AGA Research Foundation
4930 Del Ray Avenue
Bethesda, MD 20814
Or donate over the phone by calling (301) 222-4002. All gifts are tax-deductible to the fullest extent of US law. Join us!
Dr. Camilleri is AGA Research Foundation Chair and Past AGA Institute President. He is a consultant in the Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
To my fellow AGA Members, I’m not the first to tell you that real progress in the diagnosis, treatment, and cure of digestive disease is at risk. Research funding from traditional sources, like the National Institutes of Health, continues to shrink. We can expect even greater cuts on the horizon.
GI investigators in the early stages of their careers are particularly hard hit. They are finding it much more difficult to secure needed federal funding. As a result, many of these investigators are walking away from GI research frustrated by a lack of support.
It is our hope that physicians have an abundance of new tools and treatments to care for their patients suffering from digestive disorders.
You know that research has revolutionized the care of many digestive disease patients. These patients, as well as everyone in the GI field clinicians and researchers alike, have benefited from the discoveries of passionate investigators, past and present.
This is where you can help.
New treatments and devices are the result of years of research. The AGA Research Foundation grants are critical to continuing the GI pipeline.
Help us fund more researchers by supporting the AGA Research Foundation with a year-end donation. Your donation will support young investigators’ research careers and help assure research is continued.
Be gracious, generous and giving to the future of the GI specialty this holiday season. There are three easy ways to give:
Make a tax-deductible donation online at www. foundation.gastro.org.
Send a donation through the mail to:
AGA Research Foundation
4930 Del Ray Avenue
Bethesda, MD 20814
Or donate over the phone by calling (301) 222-4002. All gifts are tax-deductible to the fullest extent of US law. Join us!
Dr. Camilleri is AGA Research Foundation Chair and Past AGA Institute President. He is a consultant in the Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Unlock the Latest Clinical Updates with the 2024 PG Course OnDemand
Did you miss out on the AGA Postgraduate Course this year?
Visit agau.gastro.org to purchase today for flexible, on-the-go access to the latest clinical advances in the GI field.
- Unparalleled access: Choose when and where you dive into content with convenient access from any computer or mobile device.
- Incredible faculty: Learn from renowned experts who will offer their perspectives on cutting-edge research and clinical guidance.
- Tangible strategies: Expert and early career faculty will guide you through challenging patient cases and provide strategies you can easily implement upon your return to the office.
- Efficient learning: Content is organized by category: GI oncology, neurogastroenterology & motility, obesity, advanced endoscopy, and liver.
- Continuing education: With CME testing integrated directly into each session, you can easily earn up to 16 CME and MOC credits through December 31, 2024.
Did you miss out on the AGA Postgraduate Course this year?
Visit agau.gastro.org to purchase today for flexible, on-the-go access to the latest clinical advances in the GI field.
- Unparalleled access: Choose when and where you dive into content with convenient access from any computer or mobile device.
- Incredible faculty: Learn from renowned experts who will offer their perspectives on cutting-edge research and clinical guidance.
- Tangible strategies: Expert and early career faculty will guide you through challenging patient cases and provide strategies you can easily implement upon your return to the office.
- Efficient learning: Content is organized by category: GI oncology, neurogastroenterology & motility, obesity, advanced endoscopy, and liver.
- Continuing education: With CME testing integrated directly into each session, you can easily earn up to 16 CME and MOC credits through December 31, 2024.
Did you miss out on the AGA Postgraduate Course this year?
Visit agau.gastro.org to purchase today for flexible, on-the-go access to the latest clinical advances in the GI field.
- Unparalleled access: Choose when and where you dive into content with convenient access from any computer or mobile device.
- Incredible faculty: Learn from renowned experts who will offer their perspectives on cutting-edge research and clinical guidance.
- Tangible strategies: Expert and early career faculty will guide you through challenging patient cases and provide strategies you can easily implement upon your return to the office.
- Efficient learning: Content is organized by category: GI oncology, neurogastroenterology & motility, obesity, advanced endoscopy, and liver.
- Continuing education: With CME testing integrated directly into each session, you can easily earn up to 16 CME and MOC credits through December 31, 2024.
Revival of the aspiration vs chest tube debate for PSP
Thoracic Oncology and Chest Procedures Network
Pleural Disease Section
Considerable heterogeneity exists in the management of primary spontaneous pneumothorax (PSP). American and European guidelines have been grappling with this question for decades: What is the best way to manage PSP? A 2023 randomized, controlled trial (Marx et al. AJRCCM) sought to answer this.
The study recruited 379 adults aged 18 to 55 years between 2009 and 2015, with complete and first PSP in 31 French hospitals. One hundred eighty-nine patients initially received simple aspiration and 190 received chest tube drainage. The aspiration device was removed if a chest radiograph (CXR) following 30 minutes of aspiration showed lung apposition, with suction repeated up to one time with incomplete re-expansion. The chest tubes were large-bore (16-F or 20-F) and removed 72 hours postprocedure if the CXR showed complete lung re-expansion.
Simple aspiration was statistically inferior to chest tube drainage (29% vs 18%). However, first-line simple aspiration resulted in shorter length of stay, less subcutaneous emphysema, site infection, pain, and one-year recurrence.
Since most first-time PSP occurs in younger, healthier adults, simple aspiration could still be considered as it is better tolerated than large-bore chest tubes. However, with more frequent use of small-bore (≤14-F) catheters, ambulatory drainage could also be a suitable option in carefully selected patients. Additionally, inpatient chest tubes do not need to remain in place for 72 hours, as was this study’s protocol. Society guidelines will need to weigh in on the latest high-quality evidence available for final recommendations.
Thoracic Oncology and Chest Procedures Network
Pleural Disease Section
Considerable heterogeneity exists in the management of primary spontaneous pneumothorax (PSP). American and European guidelines have been grappling with this question for decades: What is the best way to manage PSP? A 2023 randomized, controlled trial (Marx et al. AJRCCM) sought to answer this.
The study recruited 379 adults aged 18 to 55 years between 2009 and 2015, with complete and first PSP in 31 French hospitals. One hundred eighty-nine patients initially received simple aspiration and 190 received chest tube drainage. The aspiration device was removed if a chest radiograph (CXR) following 30 minutes of aspiration showed lung apposition, with suction repeated up to one time with incomplete re-expansion. The chest tubes were large-bore (16-F or 20-F) and removed 72 hours postprocedure if the CXR showed complete lung re-expansion.
Simple aspiration was statistically inferior to chest tube drainage (29% vs 18%). However, first-line simple aspiration resulted in shorter length of stay, less subcutaneous emphysema, site infection, pain, and one-year recurrence.
Since most first-time PSP occurs in younger, healthier adults, simple aspiration could still be considered as it is better tolerated than large-bore chest tubes. However, with more frequent use of small-bore (≤14-F) catheters, ambulatory drainage could also be a suitable option in carefully selected patients. Additionally, inpatient chest tubes do not need to remain in place for 72 hours, as was this study’s protocol. Society guidelines will need to weigh in on the latest high-quality evidence available for final recommendations.
Thoracic Oncology and Chest Procedures Network
Pleural Disease Section
Considerable heterogeneity exists in the management of primary spontaneous pneumothorax (PSP). American and European guidelines have been grappling with this question for decades: What is the best way to manage PSP? A 2023 randomized, controlled trial (Marx et al. AJRCCM) sought to answer this.
The study recruited 379 adults aged 18 to 55 years between 2009 and 2015, with complete and first PSP in 31 French hospitals. One hundred eighty-nine patients initially received simple aspiration and 190 received chest tube drainage. The aspiration device was removed if a chest radiograph (CXR) following 30 minutes of aspiration showed lung apposition, with suction repeated up to one time with incomplete re-expansion. The chest tubes were large-bore (16-F or 20-F) and removed 72 hours postprocedure if the CXR showed complete lung re-expansion.
Simple aspiration was statistically inferior to chest tube drainage (29% vs 18%). However, first-line simple aspiration resulted in shorter length of stay, less subcutaneous emphysema, site infection, pain, and one-year recurrence.
Since most first-time PSP occurs in younger, healthier adults, simple aspiration could still be considered as it is better tolerated than large-bore chest tubes. However, with more frequent use of small-bore (≤14-F) catheters, ambulatory drainage could also be a suitable option in carefully selected patients. Additionally, inpatient chest tubes do not need to remain in place for 72 hours, as was this study’s protocol. Society guidelines will need to weigh in on the latest high-quality evidence available for final recommendations.
AI applications in pediatric pulmonary, sleep, and critical care medicine
Airways Disorders Network
Pediatric Chest Medicine Section
Artificial intelligence (AI) refers to the science and engineering of making intelligent machines that mimic human cognitive functions, such as learning and problem solving.1 Asthma exacerbations in young children were detected reliably by AI-aided stethoscope alone.2 Inhaler use has been successfully tracked using active and passive patient input to cloud-based dashboards.3 Asthma specialists can potentially use this knowledge to intervene in real time or more frequent intervals than the current episodic care.
Sleep trackers using commercial-grade sensors can provide useful information about sleep hygiene, sleep duration, and nocturnal awakenings. An increasing number of “wearables” and “nearables” that utilize AI algorithms to evaluate sleep duration and quality are FDA approved. AI-based scoring of polysomnography data can improve the efficiency of a sleep laboratory. Big data analysis of CPAP compliance in children led to identification of actionable items that can be targeted to improve patient outcomes.4
The use of AI models in clinical decision support can result in fewer false alerts and missed patients due to increased model accuracy. Additionally, large language model tools can automatically generate comprehensive progress notes incorporating relevant electronic medical records data, thereby reducing physician charting time.
These case uses highlight the potential to improve workflow efficiency and clinical outcomes in pediatric pulmonary and critical care by incorporating AI tools in medical decision-making and management.
References
1. McCarthy JF, Marx KA, Hoffman PE, et al. Applications of machine learning and high-dimensional visualization in cancer detection, diagnosis, and management. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2004;1020:239-262.
2. Emeryk A, Derom E, Janeczek K, et al. Home monitoring of asthma exacerbations in children and adults with use of an AI-aided stethoscope. Ann Fam Med. 2023;21(6):517-525.
3. Jaimini U, Thirunarayan K, Kalra M, Venkataraman R, Kadariya D, Sheth A. How is my child’s asthma?” Digital phenotype and actionable insights for pediatric asthma. JMIR Pediatr Parent. 2018;1(2):e11988.
4. Bhattacharjee R, Benjafield AV, Armitstead J, et al. Adherence in children using positive airway pressure therapy: a big-data analysis [published correction appears in Lancet Digit Health. 2020 Sep;2(9):e455.]. Lancet Digit Health. 2020;2(2):e94-e101.
Airways Disorders Network
Pediatric Chest Medicine Section
Artificial intelligence (AI) refers to the science and engineering of making intelligent machines that mimic human cognitive functions, such as learning and problem solving.1 Asthma exacerbations in young children were detected reliably by AI-aided stethoscope alone.2 Inhaler use has been successfully tracked using active and passive patient input to cloud-based dashboards.3 Asthma specialists can potentially use this knowledge to intervene in real time or more frequent intervals than the current episodic care.
Sleep trackers using commercial-grade sensors can provide useful information about sleep hygiene, sleep duration, and nocturnal awakenings. An increasing number of “wearables” and “nearables” that utilize AI algorithms to evaluate sleep duration and quality are FDA approved. AI-based scoring of polysomnography data can improve the efficiency of a sleep laboratory. Big data analysis of CPAP compliance in children led to identification of actionable items that can be targeted to improve patient outcomes.4
The use of AI models in clinical decision support can result in fewer false alerts and missed patients due to increased model accuracy. Additionally, large language model tools can automatically generate comprehensive progress notes incorporating relevant electronic medical records data, thereby reducing physician charting time.
These case uses highlight the potential to improve workflow efficiency and clinical outcomes in pediatric pulmonary and critical care by incorporating AI tools in medical decision-making and management.
References
1. McCarthy JF, Marx KA, Hoffman PE, et al. Applications of machine learning and high-dimensional visualization in cancer detection, diagnosis, and management. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2004;1020:239-262.
2. Emeryk A, Derom E, Janeczek K, et al. Home monitoring of asthma exacerbations in children and adults with use of an AI-aided stethoscope. Ann Fam Med. 2023;21(6):517-525.
3. Jaimini U, Thirunarayan K, Kalra M, Venkataraman R, Kadariya D, Sheth A. How is my child’s asthma?” Digital phenotype and actionable insights for pediatric asthma. JMIR Pediatr Parent. 2018;1(2):e11988.
4. Bhattacharjee R, Benjafield AV, Armitstead J, et al. Adherence in children using positive airway pressure therapy: a big-data analysis [published correction appears in Lancet Digit Health. 2020 Sep;2(9):e455.]. Lancet Digit Health. 2020;2(2):e94-e101.
Airways Disorders Network
Pediatric Chest Medicine Section
Artificial intelligence (AI) refers to the science and engineering of making intelligent machines that mimic human cognitive functions, such as learning and problem solving.1 Asthma exacerbations in young children were detected reliably by AI-aided stethoscope alone.2 Inhaler use has been successfully tracked using active and passive patient input to cloud-based dashboards.3 Asthma specialists can potentially use this knowledge to intervene in real time or more frequent intervals than the current episodic care.
Sleep trackers using commercial-grade sensors can provide useful information about sleep hygiene, sleep duration, and nocturnal awakenings. An increasing number of “wearables” and “nearables” that utilize AI algorithms to evaluate sleep duration and quality are FDA approved. AI-based scoring of polysomnography data can improve the efficiency of a sleep laboratory. Big data analysis of CPAP compliance in children led to identification of actionable items that can be targeted to improve patient outcomes.4
The use of AI models in clinical decision support can result in fewer false alerts and missed patients due to increased model accuracy. Additionally, large language model tools can automatically generate comprehensive progress notes incorporating relevant electronic medical records data, thereby reducing physician charting time.
These case uses highlight the potential to improve workflow efficiency and clinical outcomes in pediatric pulmonary and critical care by incorporating AI tools in medical decision-making and management.
References
1. McCarthy JF, Marx KA, Hoffman PE, et al. Applications of machine learning and high-dimensional visualization in cancer detection, diagnosis, and management. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2004;1020:239-262.
2. Emeryk A, Derom E, Janeczek K, et al. Home monitoring of asthma exacerbations in children and adults with use of an AI-aided stethoscope. Ann Fam Med. 2023;21(6):517-525.
3. Jaimini U, Thirunarayan K, Kalra M, Venkataraman R, Kadariya D, Sheth A. How is my child’s asthma?” Digital phenotype and actionable insights for pediatric asthma. JMIR Pediatr Parent. 2018;1(2):e11988.
4. Bhattacharjee R, Benjafield AV, Armitstead J, et al. Adherence in children using positive airway pressure therapy: a big-data analysis [published correction appears in Lancet Digit Health. 2020 Sep;2(9):e455.]. Lancet Digit Health. 2020;2(2):e94-e101.
Mechanical power: A missing piece in lung-protective ventilation?
Critical Care Network
Mechanical Ventilation and Airways Management Section
The ARDSNet trial demonstrated the importance of low tidal volume ventilation in patients with ARDS, and we have learned to monitor parameters such as plateau pressure and driving pressure (DP) to ensure lung-protective ventilation. What role does the higher respiratory rate play? There is growing evidence that respiratory rate may play an important part in the pathogenesis of ventilator-induced lung injury (VILI) and the dynamic effect of both rate and static pressures needs to be evaluated.
The concept of mechanical power (MP) was formalized in 2016 by Gattinoni, et al and defined as the product of respiratory rate and total inflation energy gained per breath.1 Calculations have been developed for both volume-controlled and pressure-controlled ventilation, including elements such as respiratory rate and PEEP. Studies have shown that increased MP is associated with ICU and hospital mortality, even at low tidal volumes.2 The use of MP remains limited in clinical practice due to its dynamic nature and difficulty of calculating in routine clinical practice but may be a feasible addition to the continuous monitoring outputs on a ventilator. Additional prospective studies are also needed to define the optimal threshold of MP and to compare monitoring strategies using MP vs DP.
References
1. Gattinoni L, Tonetti T, Cressoni M, et al. Ventilator-related causes of lung injury: the mechanical power. Intensive Care Med. 2016;42(10):1567-1575.
2. Serpa Neto A, Deliberato RO, Johnson AEW, et al. Mechanical power of ventilation is associated with mortality in critically ill patients: an analysis of patients in two observational cohorts. Intensive Care Med. 2018;44(11):1914-1922.
Critical Care Network
Mechanical Ventilation and Airways Management Section
The ARDSNet trial demonstrated the importance of low tidal volume ventilation in patients with ARDS, and we have learned to monitor parameters such as plateau pressure and driving pressure (DP) to ensure lung-protective ventilation. What role does the higher respiratory rate play? There is growing evidence that respiratory rate may play an important part in the pathogenesis of ventilator-induced lung injury (VILI) and the dynamic effect of both rate and static pressures needs to be evaluated.
The concept of mechanical power (MP) was formalized in 2016 by Gattinoni, et al and defined as the product of respiratory rate and total inflation energy gained per breath.1 Calculations have been developed for both volume-controlled and pressure-controlled ventilation, including elements such as respiratory rate and PEEP. Studies have shown that increased MP is associated with ICU and hospital mortality, even at low tidal volumes.2 The use of MP remains limited in clinical practice due to its dynamic nature and difficulty of calculating in routine clinical practice but may be a feasible addition to the continuous monitoring outputs on a ventilator. Additional prospective studies are also needed to define the optimal threshold of MP and to compare monitoring strategies using MP vs DP.
References
1. Gattinoni L, Tonetti T, Cressoni M, et al. Ventilator-related causes of lung injury: the mechanical power. Intensive Care Med. 2016;42(10):1567-1575.
2. Serpa Neto A, Deliberato RO, Johnson AEW, et al. Mechanical power of ventilation is associated with mortality in critically ill patients: an analysis of patients in two observational cohorts. Intensive Care Med. 2018;44(11):1914-1922.
Critical Care Network
Mechanical Ventilation and Airways Management Section
The ARDSNet trial demonstrated the importance of low tidal volume ventilation in patients with ARDS, and we have learned to monitor parameters such as plateau pressure and driving pressure (DP) to ensure lung-protective ventilation. What role does the higher respiratory rate play? There is growing evidence that respiratory rate may play an important part in the pathogenesis of ventilator-induced lung injury (VILI) and the dynamic effect of both rate and static pressures needs to be evaluated.
The concept of mechanical power (MP) was formalized in 2016 by Gattinoni, et al and defined as the product of respiratory rate and total inflation energy gained per breath.1 Calculations have been developed for both volume-controlled and pressure-controlled ventilation, including elements such as respiratory rate and PEEP. Studies have shown that increased MP is associated with ICU and hospital mortality, even at low tidal volumes.2 The use of MP remains limited in clinical practice due to its dynamic nature and difficulty of calculating in routine clinical practice but may be a feasible addition to the continuous monitoring outputs on a ventilator. Additional prospective studies are also needed to define the optimal threshold of MP and to compare monitoring strategies using MP vs DP.
References
1. Gattinoni L, Tonetti T, Cressoni M, et al. Ventilator-related causes of lung injury: the mechanical power. Intensive Care Med. 2016;42(10):1567-1575.
2. Serpa Neto A, Deliberato RO, Johnson AEW, et al. Mechanical power of ventilation is associated with mortality in critically ill patients: an analysis of patients in two observational cohorts. Intensive Care Med. 2018;44(11):1914-1922.
Major takeaways from the seventh world symposium on PH
Pulmonary Vascular and Cardiovascular Network
Pulmonary Vascular Disease Section
The core definition of pulmonary hypertension (PH) remains a mean pulmonary arterial pressure (mPAP) > 20 mm Hg, with precapillary PH defined by a pulmonary arterial wedge pressure (PCWP) ≤ 15 mm Hg and pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR) > 2 Wood units (WU), similar to the 2022 European guidelines.1,2 There was recognition of uncertainty in patients with borderline PAWP (12-18 mm Hg) for postcapillary PH.
It’s crucial to phenotype patients, especially those with valvular heart disease, hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, or amyloid cardiomyopathy, and to be cautious when using PAH medications for this PH group.3
Group 3 PH is often underrecognized and associated with poor outcomes, so screening in clinically stable patients is recommended using a multimodal assessment before hemodynamic evaluation. Inhaled treprostinil is recommended for PH associated with interstitial lung disease (ILD). However, the PERFECT trial on PH therapy in COPD was stopped due to safety concerns, highlighting the need for careful evaluation in chronic lung disease (CLD) patients.4 For risk stratification, further emphasis was made on cardiac imaging and hemodynamic data.
Significant progress was made in understanding four key pathways, including bone morphogenetic protein (BMP)/activin signaling. A treatment algorithm based on risk stratification was reinforced, recommending initial triple therapy with parenteral prostacyclin analogs for high-risk patients.5 Follow-up reassessment may include adding an activin-signaling inhibitor for all risk groups except low risk, as well as oral or inhaled prostacyclin for intermediate-low risk groups.
References
1. Kovacs G, Bartolome S, Denton CP, et al. Definition, classification and diagnosis of pulmonary hypertension. Eur Respir J. 2024;2401324. (Online ahead of print.)
2. Humbert M, Kovacs G, Hoeper MM, et al. 2022 ESC/ERS Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of pulmonary hypertension. Eur Respir J. 2024;61(1):2200879.
3. Maron BA, Bortman G, De Marco T, et al. Pulmonary hypertension associated with left heart disease. Eur Respir J. 2024;2401344. (Online ahead of print.)
4. Shlobin OA, Adir Y, Barbera JA, et al. Pulmonary hypertension associated with lung diseases. Eur Respir J. 2024;2401200. (Online ahead of print.)
5. Chin KM, Gaine SP, Gerges C, et al. Treatment algorithm for pulmonary arterial hypertension. Eur Respir J. 2024;2401325. (Online ahead of print.)
Pulmonary Vascular and Cardiovascular Network
Pulmonary Vascular Disease Section
The core definition of pulmonary hypertension (PH) remains a mean pulmonary arterial pressure (mPAP) > 20 mm Hg, with precapillary PH defined by a pulmonary arterial wedge pressure (PCWP) ≤ 15 mm Hg and pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR) > 2 Wood units (WU), similar to the 2022 European guidelines.1,2 There was recognition of uncertainty in patients with borderline PAWP (12-18 mm Hg) for postcapillary PH.
It’s crucial to phenotype patients, especially those with valvular heart disease, hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, or amyloid cardiomyopathy, and to be cautious when using PAH medications for this PH group.3
Group 3 PH is often underrecognized and associated with poor outcomes, so screening in clinically stable patients is recommended using a multimodal assessment before hemodynamic evaluation. Inhaled treprostinil is recommended for PH associated with interstitial lung disease (ILD). However, the PERFECT trial on PH therapy in COPD was stopped due to safety concerns, highlighting the need for careful evaluation in chronic lung disease (CLD) patients.4 For risk stratification, further emphasis was made on cardiac imaging and hemodynamic data.
Significant progress was made in understanding four key pathways, including bone morphogenetic protein (BMP)/activin signaling. A treatment algorithm based on risk stratification was reinforced, recommending initial triple therapy with parenteral prostacyclin analogs for high-risk patients.5 Follow-up reassessment may include adding an activin-signaling inhibitor for all risk groups except low risk, as well as oral or inhaled prostacyclin for intermediate-low risk groups.
References
1. Kovacs G, Bartolome S, Denton CP, et al. Definition, classification and diagnosis of pulmonary hypertension. Eur Respir J. 2024;2401324. (Online ahead of print.)
2. Humbert M, Kovacs G, Hoeper MM, et al. 2022 ESC/ERS Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of pulmonary hypertension. Eur Respir J. 2024;61(1):2200879.
3. Maron BA, Bortman G, De Marco T, et al. Pulmonary hypertension associated with left heart disease. Eur Respir J. 2024;2401344. (Online ahead of print.)
4. Shlobin OA, Adir Y, Barbera JA, et al. Pulmonary hypertension associated with lung diseases. Eur Respir J. 2024;2401200. (Online ahead of print.)
5. Chin KM, Gaine SP, Gerges C, et al. Treatment algorithm for pulmonary arterial hypertension. Eur Respir J. 2024;2401325. (Online ahead of print.)
Pulmonary Vascular and Cardiovascular Network
Pulmonary Vascular Disease Section
The core definition of pulmonary hypertension (PH) remains a mean pulmonary arterial pressure (mPAP) > 20 mm Hg, with precapillary PH defined by a pulmonary arterial wedge pressure (PCWP) ≤ 15 mm Hg and pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR) > 2 Wood units (WU), similar to the 2022 European guidelines.1,2 There was recognition of uncertainty in patients with borderline PAWP (12-18 mm Hg) for postcapillary PH.
It’s crucial to phenotype patients, especially those with valvular heart disease, hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, or amyloid cardiomyopathy, and to be cautious when using PAH medications for this PH group.3
Group 3 PH is often underrecognized and associated with poor outcomes, so screening in clinically stable patients is recommended using a multimodal assessment before hemodynamic evaluation. Inhaled treprostinil is recommended for PH associated with interstitial lung disease (ILD). However, the PERFECT trial on PH therapy in COPD was stopped due to safety concerns, highlighting the need for careful evaluation in chronic lung disease (CLD) patients.4 For risk stratification, further emphasis was made on cardiac imaging and hemodynamic data.
Significant progress was made in understanding four key pathways, including bone morphogenetic protein (BMP)/activin signaling. A treatment algorithm based on risk stratification was reinforced, recommending initial triple therapy with parenteral prostacyclin analogs for high-risk patients.5 Follow-up reassessment may include adding an activin-signaling inhibitor for all risk groups except low risk, as well as oral or inhaled prostacyclin for intermediate-low risk groups.
References
1. Kovacs G, Bartolome S, Denton CP, et al. Definition, classification and diagnosis of pulmonary hypertension. Eur Respir J. 2024;2401324. (Online ahead of print.)
2. Humbert M, Kovacs G, Hoeper MM, et al. 2022 ESC/ERS Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of pulmonary hypertension. Eur Respir J. 2024;61(1):2200879.
3. Maron BA, Bortman G, De Marco T, et al. Pulmonary hypertension associated with left heart disease. Eur Respir J. 2024;2401344. (Online ahead of print.)
4. Shlobin OA, Adir Y, Barbera JA, et al. Pulmonary hypertension associated with lung diseases. Eur Respir J. 2024;2401200. (Online ahead of print.)
5. Chin KM, Gaine SP, Gerges C, et al. Treatment algorithm for pulmonary arterial hypertension. Eur Respir J. 2024;2401325. (Online ahead of print.)
Extending exercise testing using telehealth monitoring in patients with ILD
Diffuse Lung Disease and Lung Transplant Network
Pulmonary Physiology and Rehabilitation Section
The COVID-19 pandemic revolutionized the use of monitoring equipment in general and oxygen saturation monitoring devices as pulse oximeters in specific. The increasing adoption of activity trackers is geared toward promoting an active lifestyle through real-time feedback and continuous monitoring. Patients with interstitial lung diseases (ILDs) suffer from different symptoms; one of the most disabling is dyspnea. Primarily associated with oxygen desaturation, it initiates a detrimental cycle of decreased physical activity, ultimately compromising the overall quality of life.
The use of activity trackers has shown to enhance exercise capacity among ILD and sarcoidosis patients.1
Implementing continuous monitor activity by activity trackers coupled with continuous oxygen saturation can provide a comprehensive tool to follow up with ILD patients efficiently and accurately based on established use of a six-minute walk test (6MWT) and desaturation screen. Combined 6MWT and desaturation screens remain the principal predictors to assess the disease progression and treatment response in a variety of lung diseases, mainly pulmonary hypertension and ILD and serve as a prognostic indicator of those patients.2 One of the test limitations is that the distance walked in six minutes reflects fluctuations in quality of life.3 Also, the test measures submaximal exercise performance rather than maximal exercise capacity.4
Associations have been found in that the amplitude of oxygen desaturation at the end of exercise was poorly reproducible in 6MWT in idiopathic Interstitial pneumonia.5
Considering the mentioned limitations of the classic 6MWT, an alternative approach involves extended desaturation screen using telehealth and involving different activity levels. However, further validation across a diverse spectrum of ILDs remains essential.
References
1. Cho PSP, Vasudevan S, Maddocks M, et al. Physical inactivity in pulmonary sarcoidosis. Lung. 2019;197(3):285-293.
2. Flaherty KR, Andrei AC, Murray S, et al. Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: prognostic value of changes in physiology and six-minute-walk test. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2006;174(7), 803-809.
3. Olsson LG, Swedberg K, Clark AL, Witte KK, Cleland JG. Six-minute corridor walk test as an outcome measure for the assessment of treatment in randomized, blinded intervention trials of chronic heart failure: a systematic review. Eur Heart J. 2005;26(8):778-793.
4. Ingle L, Wilkinson M, Carroll S, et al. Cardiorespiratory requirements of the 6-min walk test in older patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction and no major structural heart disease. Int J Sports Med. 2007;28(8):678-684. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2007-964886
5. Eaton T, Young P, Milne D, Wells AU. Six-minute walk, maximal exercise tests: reproducibility in fibrotic interstitial pneumonia. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2005;171(10):1150-1157.
Diffuse Lung Disease and Lung Transplant Network
Pulmonary Physiology and Rehabilitation Section
The COVID-19 pandemic revolutionized the use of monitoring equipment in general and oxygen saturation monitoring devices as pulse oximeters in specific. The increasing adoption of activity trackers is geared toward promoting an active lifestyle through real-time feedback and continuous monitoring. Patients with interstitial lung diseases (ILDs) suffer from different symptoms; one of the most disabling is dyspnea. Primarily associated with oxygen desaturation, it initiates a detrimental cycle of decreased physical activity, ultimately compromising the overall quality of life.
The use of activity trackers has shown to enhance exercise capacity among ILD and sarcoidosis patients.1
Implementing continuous monitor activity by activity trackers coupled with continuous oxygen saturation can provide a comprehensive tool to follow up with ILD patients efficiently and accurately based on established use of a six-minute walk test (6MWT) and desaturation screen. Combined 6MWT and desaturation screens remain the principal predictors to assess the disease progression and treatment response in a variety of lung diseases, mainly pulmonary hypertension and ILD and serve as a prognostic indicator of those patients.2 One of the test limitations is that the distance walked in six minutes reflects fluctuations in quality of life.3 Also, the test measures submaximal exercise performance rather than maximal exercise capacity.4
Associations have been found in that the amplitude of oxygen desaturation at the end of exercise was poorly reproducible in 6MWT in idiopathic Interstitial pneumonia.5
Considering the mentioned limitations of the classic 6MWT, an alternative approach involves extended desaturation screen using telehealth and involving different activity levels. However, further validation across a diverse spectrum of ILDs remains essential.
References
1. Cho PSP, Vasudevan S, Maddocks M, et al. Physical inactivity in pulmonary sarcoidosis. Lung. 2019;197(3):285-293.
2. Flaherty KR, Andrei AC, Murray S, et al. Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: prognostic value of changes in physiology and six-minute-walk test. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2006;174(7), 803-809.
3. Olsson LG, Swedberg K, Clark AL, Witte KK, Cleland JG. Six-minute corridor walk test as an outcome measure for the assessment of treatment in randomized, blinded intervention trials of chronic heart failure: a systematic review. Eur Heart J. 2005;26(8):778-793.
4. Ingle L, Wilkinson M, Carroll S, et al. Cardiorespiratory requirements of the 6-min walk test in older patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction and no major structural heart disease. Int J Sports Med. 2007;28(8):678-684. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2007-964886
5. Eaton T, Young P, Milne D, Wells AU. Six-minute walk, maximal exercise tests: reproducibility in fibrotic interstitial pneumonia. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2005;171(10):1150-1157.
Diffuse Lung Disease and Lung Transplant Network
Pulmonary Physiology and Rehabilitation Section
The COVID-19 pandemic revolutionized the use of monitoring equipment in general and oxygen saturation monitoring devices as pulse oximeters in specific. The increasing adoption of activity trackers is geared toward promoting an active lifestyle through real-time feedback and continuous monitoring. Patients with interstitial lung diseases (ILDs) suffer from different symptoms; one of the most disabling is dyspnea. Primarily associated with oxygen desaturation, it initiates a detrimental cycle of decreased physical activity, ultimately compromising the overall quality of life.
The use of activity trackers has shown to enhance exercise capacity among ILD and sarcoidosis patients.1
Implementing continuous monitor activity by activity trackers coupled with continuous oxygen saturation can provide a comprehensive tool to follow up with ILD patients efficiently and accurately based on established use of a six-minute walk test (6MWT) and desaturation screen. Combined 6MWT and desaturation screens remain the principal predictors to assess the disease progression and treatment response in a variety of lung diseases, mainly pulmonary hypertension and ILD and serve as a prognostic indicator of those patients.2 One of the test limitations is that the distance walked in six minutes reflects fluctuations in quality of life.3 Also, the test measures submaximal exercise performance rather than maximal exercise capacity.4
Associations have been found in that the amplitude of oxygen desaturation at the end of exercise was poorly reproducible in 6MWT in idiopathic Interstitial pneumonia.5
Considering the mentioned limitations of the classic 6MWT, an alternative approach involves extended desaturation screen using telehealth and involving different activity levels. However, further validation across a diverse spectrum of ILDs remains essential.
References
1. Cho PSP, Vasudevan S, Maddocks M, et al. Physical inactivity in pulmonary sarcoidosis. Lung. 2019;197(3):285-293.
2. Flaherty KR, Andrei AC, Murray S, et al. Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: prognostic value of changes in physiology and six-minute-walk test. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2006;174(7), 803-809.
3. Olsson LG, Swedberg K, Clark AL, Witte KK, Cleland JG. Six-minute corridor walk test as an outcome measure for the assessment of treatment in randomized, blinded intervention trials of chronic heart failure: a systematic review. Eur Heart J. 2005;26(8):778-793.
4. Ingle L, Wilkinson M, Carroll S, et al. Cardiorespiratory requirements of the 6-min walk test in older patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction and no major structural heart disease. Int J Sports Med. 2007;28(8):678-684. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2007-964886
5. Eaton T, Young P, Milne D, Wells AU. Six-minute walk, maximal exercise tests: reproducibility in fibrotic interstitial pneumonia. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2005;171(10):1150-1157.
Should napping be recommended as a health behavior?
I was invited to a cardiology conference to talk about sleep, specifically the benefits of napping for health and cognition. After the talk, along with the usual questions related to my research, the cardiac surgeons in the room shifted the conversation to better resemble a group therapy session, sharing their harrowing personal tales of coping with sleep loss on the job. The most dramatic story involved a resident in a military hospital who, unable to avoid the effects of her mounting sleep loss, did a face plant into the open chest of the patient on the surgery table.
Epidemiology studies have associated insufficient sleep with increased disease risk, including cardiovascular and metabolic disease, diabetes, cancer, Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias, as well as early mortality. Laboratory studies that experimentally restrict sleep show deficits across many cognitive domains, including executive functions, long-term memory, as well as emotional processing and regulation. Insufficient sleep in adolescents can longitudinally predict depression, thought problems, and lower crystallized intelligence, as well as structural brain properties. In older adults, it can predict the onset of chronic disease, including Alzheimer’s disease. Repeated nights of insufficient sleep (eg, three to four nights of four to six hours of sleep) have been shown to dysregulate hormone release, elevate body temperature and heart rate, stimulate appetite, and create an imbalance between the two branches of the autonomic nervous system by prolonging sympathetic activity and reducing parasympathetic restorative activity.
Given this ever-increasing list of ill effects of poor sleep, the quest for an effective, inexpensive, and manageable intervention for sleep loss often leads to the question: What about naps? A nap is typically defined as a period of sleep between five minutes to three hours, although naps can occur at any hour, they are usually daytime sleep behaviors. Between 40% and 60% of adults nap regularly, at least once a week, and, excluding novelty nap boutiques, they are free of charge and require little management or oversight. Yet, for all their apparent positive aspects, the jury is still out on whether naps should be recommended as a sleep loss countermeasure due to the lack of agreement across studies as to their effects on health.
Naps are studied in primarily two scientific contexts: laboratory experimental studies and epidemiological studies. Laboratory experimental studies measure the effect of short bouts of sleep as a fatigue countermeasure or cognitive enhancer under total sleep deprivation, sleep restriction (four to six hours of nighttime sleep), or well-rested conditions. These experiments are usually conducted in small (20 to 30 participants) convenience samples of young adults without medical and mental health problems. Performance on computer-based cognitive tasks is tested before and after naps of varying durations. By varying nap durations, researchers can test the impact of specific sleep stages on performance improvement. For example, in well-rested, intermediate chronotype individuals, a 30-minute nap between 13:00 and 15:00 will contain mostly stage 2 sleep, whereas a nap of up to 60 minutes will include slow wave sleep, and a 90-minute nap will end on a bout of rapid eye movement sleep. Studies that vary nap duration and therefore sleep quality have demonstrated an important principle of sleep’s effect on the brain and cognitive processing, namely that each sleep stage uniquely contributes to different aspects of cognitive and emotional processing. And that when naps are inserted into a person’s day, even in well-rested conditions, they tend to perform better after the nap than if they had stayed awake. Napping leads to greater vigilance, attention, memory, motor performance, and creativity, among others, compared with equivalent wake periods.1,2 Compared with the common fatigue countermeasure—caffeine—naps enhance explicit memory performance to a greater extent.
In the second context, epidemiological studies examining the impact of napping on health outcomes are typically conducted in older, less healthy, less active populations who tend to have poorer eating habits, multiple comorbidities, psychological problems, and a wide range of socioeconomic status. The strength of this approach is the sample size, which allows for correlations between factors on a large scale while providing enough data to hopefully control for possible confounds (eg, demographics, SES, exercise and eating habits, comorbidities). However, as the data were usually collected by a different group with different goals than the current epidemiologist exploring the data, there can be a disconnect between the current study goals and the variables that were initially collected by the original research team. As such, the current researcher is left with a patchwork of dissimilar variables that they must find a way to organize to answer the current question.3
When applied to the question of health effects of napping, epidemiology researchers typically divide the population into two groups, either based on a yes or no response to a napping question, or a frequency score where those who indicate napping more than one, two, or three times a week are distinguished as nappers compared to non-nappers who don’t meet these criteria. As the field lacks standard definitions for categorizing nap behavior, it is left to the discretion of the researcher to make these decisions. Furthermore, there is usually little other information collected about napping habits that could be used to better characterize napping behavior, such as lifetime nap habits, intentional vs accidental napping, and specific motivations for napping. These secondary factors have been shown to significantly moderate the effects of napping in experimental studies.
Considering the challenges, it is not surprising that there is wide disagreement across studies as to the health effects of napping.4 On the negative side, some studies have demonstrated that napping leads to increased risk of cardiovascular disease, dementia, and mortality.5-7 On the positive side, large cohort studies that control for some of these limitations report that habitual napping can predict better health outcomes, including lower mortality risk, reduced cardiovascular disease, and increased brain volume.8,9 Furthermore, age complicates matters as recent studies in older adults report that more frequent napping may be associated with reduced propensity for sleep during morning hours, and late afternoon naps were associated with earlier melatonin onset and increased evening activity, suggesting greater circadian misalignment in nappers and strategic use of napping as an evening fatigue countermeasure. More frequent napping in older adults was also correlated with lower cognitive performance in one of three cognitive domains. These results implicate more frequent and later-in-the-day napping habits in older adults may indicate altered circadian rhythms and reduced early morning sleep, with a potential functional impact on memory function. However, the same cautionary note applies to these studies, as few nap characteristics were reported that would help interpret the study outcomes and guide recommendations.10 Thus, the important and timely question of whether napping should be recommended does not, as of yet, have an answer. For clinicians weighing the multidimensional factors associated with napping in efforts to give a considered response to their patients, I can offer a set of questions that may help with tailoring responses to each individual. A lifetime history of napping can be an indicator of a health-promoting behavior, whereas a relatively recent desire to nap may reflect an underlying comorbidity that increases fatigue, sleepiness, and unintentional daytime sleep. Motivation for napping can also be revealing, as the desire to nap may be masking symptoms of depression and anxiety.11 Nighttime sleep disturbance may promote napping or, in some cases, arise from too much napping and should always be considered as a primary health measurement. In conclusion, it’s important to recognize the significance of addressing nighttime sleep disturbance and the potential impact of napping on overall health. For many, napping can be an essential and potent habit that can be encouraged throughout the lifespan for its salutary influences.
References
1. Mednick S, Nakayama K, Stickgold R. Sleep-dependent learning: a nap is as good as a night. Nat Neurosci. 2003 Jul;6(7):697-8. doi: 10.1038/nn1078. PMID: 12819785.
2. Jones BJ, Spencer RMC. Role of Napping for Learning across the Lifespan. Curr Sleep Med Rep. 2020 Dec;6(4):290-297. Doi: 10.1007/s40675-020-00193-9. Epub 2020 Nov 12. PMID: 33816064; PMCID: PMC8011550.
3. Dunietz GL, Jansen EC, Hershner S, O’Brien LM, Peterson KE, Baylin A. Parallel Assessment Challenges in Nutritional and Sleep Epidemiology. Am J Epidemiol. 2021 Jun 1;190(6):954-961. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwaa230. PMID: 33089309; PMCID: PMC8168107.
4. Stang A. Daytime napping and health consequences: much epidemiologic work to do. Sleep Med. 2015 Jul;16(7):809-10. doi: 10.1016/j.sleep.2015.02.522. Epub 2015 Feb 14. PMID: 25772544.
5. Li, P., Gao, L., Yu, L., Zheng, X., Ulsa, M. C., Yang, H.-W., Gaba, A., Yaffe, K., Bennett, D. A., Buchman, A. S., Hu, K., & Leng, Y. (2022). Daytime napping and Alzheimer’s dementia: A potential bidirectional relationship. Alzheimer’s & Dementia : The Journal of the Alzheimer’s Association. https://doi.org/10.1002/alz.12636
6. Stang A, Dragano N., Moebus S, et al. Midday naps and the risk of coronary artery disease: results of the Heinz Nixdorf Recall Study Sleep, 35 (12) (2012), pp. 1705-1712
7. Wang K, Hu L, Wang L, Shu HN, Wang YT, Yuan Y, Cheng HP, Zhang YQ. Midday Napping, Nighttime Sleep, and Mortality: Prospective Cohort Evidence in China. Biomed Environ Sci. 2023 Aug 20;36(8):702-714. doi: 10.3967/bes2023.073. PMID: 37711082.
8. Naska A, Oikonomou E, Trichopoulou A, Psaltopoulou T, Trichopoulos D. Siesta in healthy adults and coronary mortality in the general population. Arch Intern Med. 2007 Feb 12;167(3):296-301. Doi: 10.1001/archinte.167.3.296. PMID: 17296887.
9. Paz V, Dashti HS, Garfield V. Is there an association between daytime napping, cognitive function, and brain volume? A Mendelian randomization study in the UK Biobank. Sleep Health. 2023 Oct;9(5):786-793. Doi: 10.1016/j.sleh.2023.05.002. Epub 2023 Jun 20. PMID: 37344293.
10. Mednick SC. Is napping in older adults problematic or productive? The answer may lie in the reason they nap. Sleep. 2024 May 10;47(5):zsae056. doi: 10.1093/sleep/zsae056. PMID: 38421680; PMCID: PMC11082470.
11. Duggan KA, McDevitt EA, Whitehurst LN, Mednick SC. To Nap, Perchance to DREAM: A Factor Analysis of College Students’ Self-Reported Reasons for Napping. Behav Sleep Med. 2018 Mar-Apr;16(2):135-153. doi: 10.1080/15402002.2016.1178115. Epub 2016 Jun 27. PMID: 27347727; PMCID: PMC5374038.
I was invited to a cardiology conference to talk about sleep, specifically the benefits of napping for health and cognition. After the talk, along with the usual questions related to my research, the cardiac surgeons in the room shifted the conversation to better resemble a group therapy session, sharing their harrowing personal tales of coping with sleep loss on the job. The most dramatic story involved a resident in a military hospital who, unable to avoid the effects of her mounting sleep loss, did a face plant into the open chest of the patient on the surgery table.
Epidemiology studies have associated insufficient sleep with increased disease risk, including cardiovascular and metabolic disease, diabetes, cancer, Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias, as well as early mortality. Laboratory studies that experimentally restrict sleep show deficits across many cognitive domains, including executive functions, long-term memory, as well as emotional processing and regulation. Insufficient sleep in adolescents can longitudinally predict depression, thought problems, and lower crystallized intelligence, as well as structural brain properties. In older adults, it can predict the onset of chronic disease, including Alzheimer’s disease. Repeated nights of insufficient sleep (eg, three to four nights of four to six hours of sleep) have been shown to dysregulate hormone release, elevate body temperature and heart rate, stimulate appetite, and create an imbalance between the two branches of the autonomic nervous system by prolonging sympathetic activity and reducing parasympathetic restorative activity.
Given this ever-increasing list of ill effects of poor sleep, the quest for an effective, inexpensive, and manageable intervention for sleep loss often leads to the question: What about naps? A nap is typically defined as a period of sleep between five minutes to three hours, although naps can occur at any hour, they are usually daytime sleep behaviors. Between 40% and 60% of adults nap regularly, at least once a week, and, excluding novelty nap boutiques, they are free of charge and require little management or oversight. Yet, for all their apparent positive aspects, the jury is still out on whether naps should be recommended as a sleep loss countermeasure due to the lack of agreement across studies as to their effects on health.
Naps are studied in primarily two scientific contexts: laboratory experimental studies and epidemiological studies. Laboratory experimental studies measure the effect of short bouts of sleep as a fatigue countermeasure or cognitive enhancer under total sleep deprivation, sleep restriction (four to six hours of nighttime sleep), or well-rested conditions. These experiments are usually conducted in small (20 to 30 participants) convenience samples of young adults without medical and mental health problems. Performance on computer-based cognitive tasks is tested before and after naps of varying durations. By varying nap durations, researchers can test the impact of specific sleep stages on performance improvement. For example, in well-rested, intermediate chronotype individuals, a 30-minute nap between 13:00 and 15:00 will contain mostly stage 2 sleep, whereas a nap of up to 60 minutes will include slow wave sleep, and a 90-minute nap will end on a bout of rapid eye movement sleep. Studies that vary nap duration and therefore sleep quality have demonstrated an important principle of sleep’s effect on the brain and cognitive processing, namely that each sleep stage uniquely contributes to different aspects of cognitive and emotional processing. And that when naps are inserted into a person’s day, even in well-rested conditions, they tend to perform better after the nap than if they had stayed awake. Napping leads to greater vigilance, attention, memory, motor performance, and creativity, among others, compared with equivalent wake periods.1,2 Compared with the common fatigue countermeasure—caffeine—naps enhance explicit memory performance to a greater extent.
In the second context, epidemiological studies examining the impact of napping on health outcomes are typically conducted in older, less healthy, less active populations who tend to have poorer eating habits, multiple comorbidities, psychological problems, and a wide range of socioeconomic status. The strength of this approach is the sample size, which allows for correlations between factors on a large scale while providing enough data to hopefully control for possible confounds (eg, demographics, SES, exercise and eating habits, comorbidities). However, as the data were usually collected by a different group with different goals than the current epidemiologist exploring the data, there can be a disconnect between the current study goals and the variables that were initially collected by the original research team. As such, the current researcher is left with a patchwork of dissimilar variables that they must find a way to organize to answer the current question.3
When applied to the question of health effects of napping, epidemiology researchers typically divide the population into two groups, either based on a yes or no response to a napping question, or a frequency score where those who indicate napping more than one, two, or three times a week are distinguished as nappers compared to non-nappers who don’t meet these criteria. As the field lacks standard definitions for categorizing nap behavior, it is left to the discretion of the researcher to make these decisions. Furthermore, there is usually little other information collected about napping habits that could be used to better characterize napping behavior, such as lifetime nap habits, intentional vs accidental napping, and specific motivations for napping. These secondary factors have been shown to significantly moderate the effects of napping in experimental studies.
Considering the challenges, it is not surprising that there is wide disagreement across studies as to the health effects of napping.4 On the negative side, some studies have demonstrated that napping leads to increased risk of cardiovascular disease, dementia, and mortality.5-7 On the positive side, large cohort studies that control for some of these limitations report that habitual napping can predict better health outcomes, including lower mortality risk, reduced cardiovascular disease, and increased brain volume.8,9 Furthermore, age complicates matters as recent studies in older adults report that more frequent napping may be associated with reduced propensity for sleep during morning hours, and late afternoon naps were associated with earlier melatonin onset and increased evening activity, suggesting greater circadian misalignment in nappers and strategic use of napping as an evening fatigue countermeasure. More frequent napping in older adults was also correlated with lower cognitive performance in one of three cognitive domains. These results implicate more frequent and later-in-the-day napping habits in older adults may indicate altered circadian rhythms and reduced early morning sleep, with a potential functional impact on memory function. However, the same cautionary note applies to these studies, as few nap characteristics were reported that would help interpret the study outcomes and guide recommendations.10 Thus, the important and timely question of whether napping should be recommended does not, as of yet, have an answer. For clinicians weighing the multidimensional factors associated with napping in efforts to give a considered response to their patients, I can offer a set of questions that may help with tailoring responses to each individual. A lifetime history of napping can be an indicator of a health-promoting behavior, whereas a relatively recent desire to nap may reflect an underlying comorbidity that increases fatigue, sleepiness, and unintentional daytime sleep. Motivation for napping can also be revealing, as the desire to nap may be masking symptoms of depression and anxiety.11 Nighttime sleep disturbance may promote napping or, in some cases, arise from too much napping and should always be considered as a primary health measurement. In conclusion, it’s important to recognize the significance of addressing nighttime sleep disturbance and the potential impact of napping on overall health. For many, napping can be an essential and potent habit that can be encouraged throughout the lifespan for its salutary influences.
References
1. Mednick S, Nakayama K, Stickgold R. Sleep-dependent learning: a nap is as good as a night. Nat Neurosci. 2003 Jul;6(7):697-8. doi: 10.1038/nn1078. PMID: 12819785.
2. Jones BJ, Spencer RMC. Role of Napping for Learning across the Lifespan. Curr Sleep Med Rep. 2020 Dec;6(4):290-297. Doi: 10.1007/s40675-020-00193-9. Epub 2020 Nov 12. PMID: 33816064; PMCID: PMC8011550.
3. Dunietz GL, Jansen EC, Hershner S, O’Brien LM, Peterson KE, Baylin A. Parallel Assessment Challenges in Nutritional and Sleep Epidemiology. Am J Epidemiol. 2021 Jun 1;190(6):954-961. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwaa230. PMID: 33089309; PMCID: PMC8168107.
4. Stang A. Daytime napping and health consequences: much epidemiologic work to do. Sleep Med. 2015 Jul;16(7):809-10. doi: 10.1016/j.sleep.2015.02.522. Epub 2015 Feb 14. PMID: 25772544.
5. Li, P., Gao, L., Yu, L., Zheng, X., Ulsa, M. C., Yang, H.-W., Gaba, A., Yaffe, K., Bennett, D. A., Buchman, A. S., Hu, K., & Leng, Y. (2022). Daytime napping and Alzheimer’s dementia: A potential bidirectional relationship. Alzheimer’s & Dementia : The Journal of the Alzheimer’s Association. https://doi.org/10.1002/alz.12636
6. Stang A, Dragano N., Moebus S, et al. Midday naps and the risk of coronary artery disease: results of the Heinz Nixdorf Recall Study Sleep, 35 (12) (2012), pp. 1705-1712
7. Wang K, Hu L, Wang L, Shu HN, Wang YT, Yuan Y, Cheng HP, Zhang YQ. Midday Napping, Nighttime Sleep, and Mortality: Prospective Cohort Evidence in China. Biomed Environ Sci. 2023 Aug 20;36(8):702-714. doi: 10.3967/bes2023.073. PMID: 37711082.
8. Naska A, Oikonomou E, Trichopoulou A, Psaltopoulou T, Trichopoulos D. Siesta in healthy adults and coronary mortality in the general population. Arch Intern Med. 2007 Feb 12;167(3):296-301. Doi: 10.1001/archinte.167.3.296. PMID: 17296887.
9. Paz V, Dashti HS, Garfield V. Is there an association between daytime napping, cognitive function, and brain volume? A Mendelian randomization study in the UK Biobank. Sleep Health. 2023 Oct;9(5):786-793. Doi: 10.1016/j.sleh.2023.05.002. Epub 2023 Jun 20. PMID: 37344293.
10. Mednick SC. Is napping in older adults problematic or productive? The answer may lie in the reason they nap. Sleep. 2024 May 10;47(5):zsae056. doi: 10.1093/sleep/zsae056. PMID: 38421680; PMCID: PMC11082470.
11. Duggan KA, McDevitt EA, Whitehurst LN, Mednick SC. To Nap, Perchance to DREAM: A Factor Analysis of College Students’ Self-Reported Reasons for Napping. Behav Sleep Med. 2018 Mar-Apr;16(2):135-153. doi: 10.1080/15402002.2016.1178115. Epub 2016 Jun 27. PMID: 27347727; PMCID: PMC5374038.
I was invited to a cardiology conference to talk about sleep, specifically the benefits of napping for health and cognition. After the talk, along with the usual questions related to my research, the cardiac surgeons in the room shifted the conversation to better resemble a group therapy session, sharing their harrowing personal tales of coping with sleep loss on the job. The most dramatic story involved a resident in a military hospital who, unable to avoid the effects of her mounting sleep loss, did a face plant into the open chest of the patient on the surgery table.
Epidemiology studies have associated insufficient sleep with increased disease risk, including cardiovascular and metabolic disease, diabetes, cancer, Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias, as well as early mortality. Laboratory studies that experimentally restrict sleep show deficits across many cognitive domains, including executive functions, long-term memory, as well as emotional processing and regulation. Insufficient sleep in adolescents can longitudinally predict depression, thought problems, and lower crystallized intelligence, as well as structural brain properties. In older adults, it can predict the onset of chronic disease, including Alzheimer’s disease. Repeated nights of insufficient sleep (eg, three to four nights of four to six hours of sleep) have been shown to dysregulate hormone release, elevate body temperature and heart rate, stimulate appetite, and create an imbalance between the two branches of the autonomic nervous system by prolonging sympathetic activity and reducing parasympathetic restorative activity.
Given this ever-increasing list of ill effects of poor sleep, the quest for an effective, inexpensive, and manageable intervention for sleep loss often leads to the question: What about naps? A nap is typically defined as a period of sleep between five minutes to three hours, although naps can occur at any hour, they are usually daytime sleep behaviors. Between 40% and 60% of adults nap regularly, at least once a week, and, excluding novelty nap boutiques, they are free of charge and require little management or oversight. Yet, for all their apparent positive aspects, the jury is still out on whether naps should be recommended as a sleep loss countermeasure due to the lack of agreement across studies as to their effects on health.
Naps are studied in primarily two scientific contexts: laboratory experimental studies and epidemiological studies. Laboratory experimental studies measure the effect of short bouts of sleep as a fatigue countermeasure or cognitive enhancer under total sleep deprivation, sleep restriction (four to six hours of nighttime sleep), or well-rested conditions. These experiments are usually conducted in small (20 to 30 participants) convenience samples of young adults without medical and mental health problems. Performance on computer-based cognitive tasks is tested before and after naps of varying durations. By varying nap durations, researchers can test the impact of specific sleep stages on performance improvement. For example, in well-rested, intermediate chronotype individuals, a 30-minute nap between 13:00 and 15:00 will contain mostly stage 2 sleep, whereas a nap of up to 60 minutes will include slow wave sleep, and a 90-minute nap will end on a bout of rapid eye movement sleep. Studies that vary nap duration and therefore sleep quality have demonstrated an important principle of sleep’s effect on the brain and cognitive processing, namely that each sleep stage uniquely contributes to different aspects of cognitive and emotional processing. And that when naps are inserted into a person’s day, even in well-rested conditions, they tend to perform better after the nap than if they had stayed awake. Napping leads to greater vigilance, attention, memory, motor performance, and creativity, among others, compared with equivalent wake periods.1,2 Compared with the common fatigue countermeasure—caffeine—naps enhance explicit memory performance to a greater extent.
In the second context, epidemiological studies examining the impact of napping on health outcomes are typically conducted in older, less healthy, less active populations who tend to have poorer eating habits, multiple comorbidities, psychological problems, and a wide range of socioeconomic status. The strength of this approach is the sample size, which allows for correlations between factors on a large scale while providing enough data to hopefully control for possible confounds (eg, demographics, SES, exercise and eating habits, comorbidities). However, as the data were usually collected by a different group with different goals than the current epidemiologist exploring the data, there can be a disconnect between the current study goals and the variables that were initially collected by the original research team. As such, the current researcher is left with a patchwork of dissimilar variables that they must find a way to organize to answer the current question.3
When applied to the question of health effects of napping, epidemiology researchers typically divide the population into two groups, either based on a yes or no response to a napping question, or a frequency score where those who indicate napping more than one, two, or three times a week are distinguished as nappers compared to non-nappers who don’t meet these criteria. As the field lacks standard definitions for categorizing nap behavior, it is left to the discretion of the researcher to make these decisions. Furthermore, there is usually little other information collected about napping habits that could be used to better characterize napping behavior, such as lifetime nap habits, intentional vs accidental napping, and specific motivations for napping. These secondary factors have been shown to significantly moderate the effects of napping in experimental studies.
Considering the challenges, it is not surprising that there is wide disagreement across studies as to the health effects of napping.4 On the negative side, some studies have demonstrated that napping leads to increased risk of cardiovascular disease, dementia, and mortality.5-7 On the positive side, large cohort studies that control for some of these limitations report that habitual napping can predict better health outcomes, including lower mortality risk, reduced cardiovascular disease, and increased brain volume.8,9 Furthermore, age complicates matters as recent studies in older adults report that more frequent napping may be associated with reduced propensity for sleep during morning hours, and late afternoon naps were associated with earlier melatonin onset and increased evening activity, suggesting greater circadian misalignment in nappers and strategic use of napping as an evening fatigue countermeasure. More frequent napping in older adults was also correlated with lower cognitive performance in one of three cognitive domains. These results implicate more frequent and later-in-the-day napping habits in older adults may indicate altered circadian rhythms and reduced early morning sleep, with a potential functional impact on memory function. However, the same cautionary note applies to these studies, as few nap characteristics were reported that would help interpret the study outcomes and guide recommendations.10 Thus, the important and timely question of whether napping should be recommended does not, as of yet, have an answer. For clinicians weighing the multidimensional factors associated with napping in efforts to give a considered response to their patients, I can offer a set of questions that may help with tailoring responses to each individual. A lifetime history of napping can be an indicator of a health-promoting behavior, whereas a relatively recent desire to nap may reflect an underlying comorbidity that increases fatigue, sleepiness, and unintentional daytime sleep. Motivation for napping can also be revealing, as the desire to nap may be masking symptoms of depression and anxiety.11 Nighttime sleep disturbance may promote napping or, in some cases, arise from too much napping and should always be considered as a primary health measurement. In conclusion, it’s important to recognize the significance of addressing nighttime sleep disturbance and the potential impact of napping on overall health. For many, napping can be an essential and potent habit that can be encouraged throughout the lifespan for its salutary influences.
References
1. Mednick S, Nakayama K, Stickgold R. Sleep-dependent learning: a nap is as good as a night. Nat Neurosci. 2003 Jul;6(7):697-8. doi: 10.1038/nn1078. PMID: 12819785.
2. Jones BJ, Spencer RMC. Role of Napping for Learning across the Lifespan. Curr Sleep Med Rep. 2020 Dec;6(4):290-297. Doi: 10.1007/s40675-020-00193-9. Epub 2020 Nov 12. PMID: 33816064; PMCID: PMC8011550.
3. Dunietz GL, Jansen EC, Hershner S, O’Brien LM, Peterson KE, Baylin A. Parallel Assessment Challenges in Nutritional and Sleep Epidemiology. Am J Epidemiol. 2021 Jun 1;190(6):954-961. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwaa230. PMID: 33089309; PMCID: PMC8168107.
4. Stang A. Daytime napping and health consequences: much epidemiologic work to do. Sleep Med. 2015 Jul;16(7):809-10. doi: 10.1016/j.sleep.2015.02.522. Epub 2015 Feb 14. PMID: 25772544.
5. Li, P., Gao, L., Yu, L., Zheng, X., Ulsa, M. C., Yang, H.-W., Gaba, A., Yaffe, K., Bennett, D. A., Buchman, A. S., Hu, K., & Leng, Y. (2022). Daytime napping and Alzheimer’s dementia: A potential bidirectional relationship. Alzheimer’s & Dementia : The Journal of the Alzheimer’s Association. https://doi.org/10.1002/alz.12636
6. Stang A, Dragano N., Moebus S, et al. Midday naps and the risk of coronary artery disease: results of the Heinz Nixdorf Recall Study Sleep, 35 (12) (2012), pp. 1705-1712
7. Wang K, Hu L, Wang L, Shu HN, Wang YT, Yuan Y, Cheng HP, Zhang YQ. Midday Napping, Nighttime Sleep, and Mortality: Prospective Cohort Evidence in China. Biomed Environ Sci. 2023 Aug 20;36(8):702-714. doi: 10.3967/bes2023.073. PMID: 37711082.
8. Naska A, Oikonomou E, Trichopoulou A, Psaltopoulou T, Trichopoulos D. Siesta in healthy adults and coronary mortality in the general population. Arch Intern Med. 2007 Feb 12;167(3):296-301. Doi: 10.1001/archinte.167.3.296. PMID: 17296887.
9. Paz V, Dashti HS, Garfield V. Is there an association between daytime napping, cognitive function, and brain volume? A Mendelian randomization study in the UK Biobank. Sleep Health. 2023 Oct;9(5):786-793. Doi: 10.1016/j.sleh.2023.05.002. Epub 2023 Jun 20. PMID: 37344293.
10. Mednick SC. Is napping in older adults problematic or productive? The answer may lie in the reason they nap. Sleep. 2024 May 10;47(5):zsae056. doi: 10.1093/sleep/zsae056. PMID: 38421680; PMCID: PMC11082470.
11. Duggan KA, McDevitt EA, Whitehurst LN, Mednick SC. To Nap, Perchance to DREAM: A Factor Analysis of College Students’ Self-Reported Reasons for Napping. Behav Sleep Med. 2018 Mar-Apr;16(2):135-153. doi: 10.1080/15402002.2016.1178115. Epub 2016 Jun 27. PMID: 27347727; PMCID: PMC5374038.