Background: In patients with COPD progressive dyspnoea leads to a sedentary lifestyle. To date, no studies exist investigating the effects of Nordic Walking in patients with COPD. Therefore, the aim was to determine the feasibility of Nordic Walking in COPD patients at different disease stages. Furthermore we aimed to determine the short-and long-term effects of Nordic Walking on COPD patients' daily physical activity pattern as well as on patients exercise capacity. Methods: Sixty COPD patients were randomised to either Nordic Walking or to a control group. Patients of the Nordic Walking group (n = 30; age: 62 ± 9 years; FEV 1 : 48 ± 19% predicted) underwent a three-month outdoor Nordic Walking exercise program consisting of one hour walking at 75% of their initial maximum heart rate three times per week, whereas controls had no exercise intervention. Primary endpoint: daily physical activities (measured by a validated tri-axial accelerometer); secondary endpoint: functional exercise capacity (measured by the six-minute walking distance; 6MWD). Assessment time points in both groups: baseline, after three, six and nine months. Results: After three month training period, in the Nordic Walking group time spent walking and standing as well as intensity of walking increased (Δ walking time: +14.9 ± 1.9 min/day; Δ standing time: +129 ± 26 min/day; Δ movement intensity: +0.40 ± 0.14 m/s

Background In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, numerous new serological test systems for the detection of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies rapidly have become available. However, the clinical performance of many of these is still insufficiently described. Therefore, we compared three commercial, CE-marked, SARS-CoV-2 antibody assays side by side. Methods We included a total of 1,154 specimens from pre-COVID-19 times and 65 samples from COVID-19 patients (≥14 days after symptom onset) to evaluate the test performance of SARS-CoV-2 serological assays by Abbott, Roche, and DiaSorin. Results All three assays presented with high specificities: 99.2% (98.6-99.7) for Abbott, 99.7% (99.2-100.0) for Roche, and 98.3% (97.3-98.9) for DiaSorin. In contrast to the manufacturers’ specifications, sensitivities only ranged from 83.1% to 89.2%. Although the three methods were in good agreement (Cohen’s Kappa 0.71-0.87), McNemar tests revealed significant differences between results obtained from Roche and DiaSorin. However, at low seroprevalences, the minor differences in specificity resulted in profound discrepancies of positive predictive values at 1% seroprevalence: 52.3% (36.2-67.9), 77.6% (52.8-91.5), and 32.6% (23.6-43.1) for Abbott, Roche, and DiaSorin, respectively. Conclusion We found diagnostically relevant differences in specificities for the anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody assays by Abbott, Roche, and DiaSorin that have a significant impact on the positive predictive values of these tests.

There is growing interest in blood eosinophil counts in the management of chronic respiratory conditions such as asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Despite this, typical blood eosinophil levels in the general population, and the impact of potential confounders on these levels have not been clearly defined.We measured blood eosinophil counts in a random sample of 11 042 subjects recruited from the general population in Austria. We then: 1) identified factors associated with high blood eosinophil counts (>75th percentile); and 2) excluded subjects with these factors to estimate median blood eosinophil counts in a “healthy” sub-population (n=3641).We found that: 1) in the entire cohort, age ≤18 years (OR 2.41), asthma (OR 2.05), current smoking (OR 1.72), positive skin prick test (OR 1.64), COPD (OR 1.56), metabolic syndrome (OR 1.41), male sex (OR 1.36) and obesity (OR 1.16) were significantly (p<0.05) associated with high blood eosinophil counts (binary multivariable logistic regression analysis), and had an additive effect; and 2) after excluding these factors, in those older than 18 years, blood eosinophil counts were higher in males than in females (median 120 (5%–95% CI: 30–330) versus 100 (30–310) cells·µL−1, respectively) and did not change with age.Median blood eosinophil counts in adults are considerably lower than those currently regarded as normal, do not change with age beyond puberty, but are significantly influenced by a variety of factors which have an additive effect. These observations will contribute to the interpretation of blood eosinophil levels in clinical practice.