Evaluation and Management of Dyspnea in Hypermobile Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome and Generalized Hypermobility Spectrum Disorder: Protocol for a Pilot and Feasibility Randomized Controlled Trial (Preprint)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND Dyspnea is a prevalent symptom in individuals with hypermobile Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome (hEDS) and generalized hypermobility spectrum disorder (G-HSD), yet its contributors have not been identified. One known contributor to dyspnea is respiratory muscle weakness. The feasibility and effectiveness of inspiratory muscle training (IMT) in combination with standard-of-care rehabilitation (aerobic, resistance, neuromuscular stabilization, and balance and proprioception exercises) in improving respiratory muscle strength and patient-reported outcomes in patients with hEDS or G-HSD have not been evaluated. OBJECTIVE This study aims to evaluate dyspnea, respiratory muscle strength, and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in hEDS or G-HSD compared with healthy controls and to assess the feasibility of a randomized controlled trial of IMT and standard-of-care rehabilitation for improving respiratory muscle strength, exercise capacity, and PROMs compared with standard-of-care rehabilitation in hEDS and G-HSD. METHODS The study will include 34 participants with hEDS or G-HSD and 17 healthy, age- and sex-matched controls to compare respiratory muscle structure and function and PROMs. After baseline assessments, participants with hEDS or G-HSD will be randomized into the intervention group and provided IMT combined with Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome standard-of-care rehabilitation or into the usual care group, and provided only standard-of-care rehabilitation for 8 weeks. The intervention group will be prescribed IMT in their home environment using the POWERbreathe K5 IMT device (POWERbreathe International Ltd). IMT will comprise 2 daily sessions of 30 breaths for 5 days per week, with IMT progressing from 20% to 60% of the baseline maximal inspiratory pressure (MIP) over an 8-week period. Feasibility will be assessed through rates of recruitment, attrition, adherence, adverse events, and participant satisfaction. The primary pilot outcome is MIP change over an 8-week period in hEDS or G-HSD. Secondary outcomes will include the evaluation of dyspnea using Medical Research Council Scale and 18-point qualitative dyspnea descriptors; diaphragmatic thickening fraction using ultrasound; respiratory muscle endurance; pulmonary function; prefrontal cortical activity using functional near-infrared spectroscopy; aerobic capacity during cardiopulmonary exercise testing; quality of life using Short Form-36; and scores from the Depression, Anxiety, and Stress scale-21. These measures will also be performed once in healthy controls to compare normative values. Multivariable regression will be used to assess the contributors to dyspnea. Paired 2-tailed t tests will be used to assess the changes in MIP and secondary measures after 8 weeks of IMT. RESULTS Study recruitment began in August 2021 and, with several disruptions owing to COVID-19, is expected to be completed by December 2023. CONCLUSIONS This study will provide a better understanding of the factors associated with dyspnea and the feasibility and effectiveness of IMT combined with standard-of-care rehabilitation. IMT may be a novel therapeutic strategy for improving respiratory muscle function and patient-reported outcomes in individuals with hEDS or G-HSD. CLINICALTRIAL ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04972565; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04972565 INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT DERR1-10.2196/44832
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.024 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.069 | 0.011 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".