Morris, Sarah J.

ABSTRACT Introduction Measurement of the work of breathing (Wb) during exercise provides useful insights into the energetics and mechanics of the respiratory muscles across a wide range of minute ventilations. The methods and analytical procedures used to calculate the Wb during exercise have yet to be critically appraised in the literature. Purpose The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the quality of methods used to measure the Wb during exercise in the available literature. Methods We conducted an extensive search of three databases for studies that measured the Wb during exercise in adult humans. Data were extracted on participant characteristics, flow/volume and pressure devices, esophageal pressure (P oes ) catheters, and methods of Wb analysis. Results A total of 120 articles were included. Flow/volume sensors used were primarily pneumotachographs ( n = 85, 70.8%), whereas the most common pressure transducer was of the variable reluctance type ( n = 63, 52.5%). Esophageal pressure was frequently obtained via balloon-tipped catheters ( n = 114, 95.0%). Few studies mentioned calibration, frequency responses, and dynamic compensation of their measurement devices. The most popular method of measuring the Wb was pressure–volume integration ( n = 51, 42.5%), followed by the modified Campbell ( n = 28, 23.3%) and Dean & Visscher diagrams ( n = 26, 21.7%). Over one-third of studies did not report the methods used to process their pressure–volume data, and the majority (60.8%) of studies used the incorrect Wb units and/or failed to discuss the limitations of their Wb measurements. Conclusions The findings of this systematic review highlight the need for the development of a standardized approach for measuring Wb, which is informative, practical, and accessible for future researchers.

The measurement of the work of breathing (Wb) during exercise provides us with deep insights into respiratory (patho)physiology, and sheds light on the putative factors which lead to respiratory muscle fatigue. There are 4 popular methods available to determine the Wb. Our study demonstrates that no two of these methods produce identical values of Wb during exercise. This paper also discusses the practical and theoretical limitations of each method.

There are growing concerns that the COVID-19 pandemic has facilitated a sedentary shift in our physical activity habits. A reduction in physical activity during the pandemic may be secondary to restrictive policies implemented at the government-level, typically those policies which limit interpersonal contact; for example, physical/social distancing. It is without question that social distancing is a necessary measure to mitigate community transmission of the novel virus; however, these policies often limit the public’s opportunities to engage in physical activity. The strictest enforcement of social distancing occurs during an authority-mandated ‘lockdown’ (also known as a ‘shelter-in-place’ or ‘stay-at-home’ order). This Viewpoint focuses on the current evidence demonstrating that physical activity declines during a COVID-19 ‘lockdown’. We highlight the point that most of the available evidence stems from investigations using non-validated, self-reported measures of physical activity and discuss the caveats therewith. This Viewpoint explores whether current evidence reflects an ‘actual’ or rather a ‘perceived’ reduction in physical activity, and raises the question of whether this distinction matters in the end.