There is increasing awareness of bronchiectasis in children and adolescents, a chronic pulmonary disorder associated with poor quality-of-life for the child/adolescent and their parents, recurrent exacerbations and costs to the family and health systems. Optimal treatment improves clinical outcomes. Several national guidelines exist, but there are no international guidelines.The European Respiratory Society (ERS) Task Force for the management of paediatric bronchiectasis sought to identify evidence-based management (investigation and treatment) strategies. It used the ERS standardised process that included a systematic review of the literature and application of the GRADE approach to define the quality of the evidence and level of recommendations.A multidisciplinary team of specialists in paediatric and adult respiratory medicine, infectious disease, physiotherapy, primary care, nursing, radiology, immunology, methodology, patient advocacy and parents of children/adolescents with bronchiectasis considered the most relevant clinical questions (for both clinicians and patients) related to managing paediatric bronchiectasis. Fourteen key clinical questions (7 “Patient, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome” [PICO] and 7 narrative) were generated. The outcomes for each PICO were decided by voting by the panel and parent advisory group.This guideline addresses the definition, diagnostic approach and antibiotic treatment of exacerbations, pathogen eradication, long-term antibiotic therapy, asthma-type therapies (inhaled corticosteroids, bronchodilators), mucoactive drugs, airway clearance, investigation of underlying causes of bronchiectasis, disease monitoring, factors to consider before surgical treatment and the reversibility and prevention of bronchiectasis in children/adolescents. Benchmarking quality of care for children/adolescents with bronchiectasis to improve clinical outcomes and evidence gaps for future research could be based on these recommendations.

Background Step-count monitors (pedometers, body-worn trackers and smartphone applications) can increase walking, helping to tackle physical inactivity. We aimed to assess the effect of step-count monitors on physical activity (PA) in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) amongst community-dwelling adults; including longer-term effects, differences between step-count monitors, and between intervention components. Methods Systematic literature searches in seven databases identified RCTs in healthy adults, or those at risk of disease, published between January 2000–April 2020. Two reviewers independently selected studies, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Outcome was mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) in steps at follow-up between treatment and control groups. Our preferred outcome measure was from studies with follow-up steps adjusted for baseline steps (change studies); but we also included studies reporting follow-up differences only (end-point studies). Multivariate-meta-analysis used random-effect estimates at different time-points for change studies only. Meta-regression compared effects of different step-count monitors and intervention components amongst all studies at ≤4 months. Results Of 12,491 records identified, 70 RCTs (at generally low risk of bias) were included, with 57 trials (16,355 participants) included in meta-analyses: 32 provided change from baseline data; 25 provided end-point only. Multivariate meta-analysis of the 32 change studies demonstrated step-counts favoured intervention groups: MD of 1126 steps/day 95%CI [787, 1466] at ≤4 months, 1050 steps/day [602, 1498] at 6 months, 464 steps/day [301, 626] at 1 year, 121 steps/day [− 64, 306] at 2 years and 434 steps/day [191, 676] at 3–4 years. Meta-regression of the 57 trials at ≤4 months demonstrated in mutually-adjusted analyses that: end-point were similar to change studies (+ 257 steps/day [− 417, 931]); body-worn trackers/smartphone applications were less effective than pedometers (− 834 steps/day [− 1542, − 126]); and interventions providing additional counselling/incentives were not better than those without (− 812 steps/day [− 1503, − 122]). Conclusions Step-count monitoring leads to short and long-term step-count increases, with no evidence that either body-worn trackers/smartphone applications, or additional counselling/incentives offer further benefit over simpler pedometer-based interventions. Simple step-count monitoring interventions should be prioritised to address the public health physical inactivity challenge. Systematic review registration PROSPERO number CRD42017075810.

Mucolytic agents versus placebo for chronic bronchitis or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

The global burden of children and young people (CYP) with bronchiectasis is being recognised increasingly. They experience a poor quality-of-life and recurrent respiratory exacerbations requiring additional treatment, including hospitalisation. However, there are no published data on patient-driven clinical needs and/or research priorities for paediatric bronchiectasis.Parent/patient-driven views are required to understand the clinical needs and research priorities to inform changes that benefit CYP with bronchiectasis and reduce their disease burden. The European Lung Foundation and the European Respiratory Society Task Force for paediatric bronchiectasis created an international roadmap of clinical and research priorities to guide, and as an extension of, the clinical practice guideline.This roadmap was based on two global web-based surveys. The first survey (10 languages) was completed by 225 respondents (parents of CYP with bronchiectasis and adults with bronchiectasis diagnosed in childhood) from 21 countries. The parents/patients’ survey encompassed both clinical and research priorities. The second survey, completed by 258 health practitioners from 54 countries, was limited to research priorities.The two highest clinical needs expressed by parents/patients were: having an action management plan for flare-ups/exacerbations and access to physiotherapists. The two highest health practitioners’ research priorities related to eradication of airway pathogens and optimal airway clearance techniques. Based on both surveys, the top 10 research priorities were derived and unanimous consensus statements were formulated from these priorities.This document addresses parents/patients’ clinical and research priorities from both the parents/patients and clinicians’ perspectives and will help guide research and clinical efforts to improve the lives of people with bronchiectasis.