Cookies on this website
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Continue' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title> <jats:p><jats:bold>Background</jats:bold>Even when resting pulse oximetry is normal in the patient with acute Covid-19, hypoxia can manifest on exertion. We summarise the literature on the performance of different rapid tests for exertional desaturation and draw on this evidence base to provide guidance in the context of acute COVID-19.<jats:bold>Main research questions</jats:bold>1. What exercise tests have been used to assess exertional hypoxia at home or in an ambulatory setting in the context of Covid-19 and to what extent have they been validated?2. What exercise tests have been used to assess exertional hypoxia in other lung conditions, to what extent have they been validated and what is the applicability of these studies to acute Covid-19?<jats:bold>Method</jats:bold>AMED, CINAHL, EMBASE MEDLINE, Cochrane and PubMed using LitCovid, Scholar and Google databases were searched to September 2020. Studies where participants had Covid-19 or another lung disease and underwent any form of exercise test which was compared to a reference standard were eligible. Risk of bias was assessed using QUADAS 2. A protocol for the review was published on the Medrxiv database.<jats:bold>Results</jats:bold>Of 47 relevant papers, 15 were empirical studies, of which 11 described an attempt to validate one or more exercise desaturation tests in lung diseases other than Covid-19. In all but one of these, methodological quality was poor or impossible to fully assess. None had been designed as a formal validation study (most used simple tests of correlation). Only one validation study (comparing a 1-minute sit-to-stand test [1MSTST] with reference to the 6-minute walk test [6MWT] in 107 patients with interstitial lung disease) contained sufficient raw data for us to calculate the sensitivity (88%), specificity (81%), and positive and negative predictive value (79% and 89% respectively) of the 1MSTST. The other 4 empirical studies included two predictive studies on patients with Covid-19, and two on HIV-positive patients with suspected pneumocystis pneumonia. We found no studies on the 40-step walk test (a less demanding test that is widely used in clinical practice to assess Covid-19 patients). Heterogeneity of study design precluded meta-analysis.<jats:bold>Discussion</jats:bold>Exertional desaturation tests have not yet been validated in patients with (or suspected of having) Covid-19. A stronger evidence base exists for the diagnostic accuracy of the 1MSTST in chronic long term pulmonary disease, the relative intensity of this test may raise safety concerns in remote consultations or unstable patients. The less strenuous 40-step walk test should be urgently evaluated.</jats:p>

Original publication

DOI

10.21203/rs.3.rs-105883/v2

Type

Journal article

Publisher

Research Square

Publication Date

10/02/2021