Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • Early View
  • Archive
  • Authors/reviewers
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • COVID-19 submission information
    • Institutional open access agreements
    • Peer reviewer login
  • Alerts
  • Subscriptions
  • ERS Publications
    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS Books
    • ERS publications home

User menu

  • Log in
  • Subscribe
  • Contact Us
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
  • ERS Publications
    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS Books
    • ERS publications home

Login

European Respiratory Society

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • Early View
  • Archive
  • Authors/reviewers
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • COVID-19 submission information
    • Institutional open access agreements
    • Peer reviewer login
  • Alerts
  • Subscriptions

Impact of the UK lockdown on people at risk of COPD

Gavin C. Donaldson, Andrew I. Ritchie, Peter M.A. Calverley, Jorgen Vestbo, Malin Fageras, Alberto de la Hoz, Enrica Bucchioni, Chris H. Compton, Karen Mezzi, Jadwiga A. Wedzicha on behalf of the BLF Early COPD Partnership
ERJ Open Research 2021 7: 00358-2021; DOI: 10.1183/23120541.00358-2021
Gavin C. Donaldson
1National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, London, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: gavin.donaldson@imperial.ac.uk
Andrew I. Ritchie
1National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, London, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Peter M.A. Calverley
2University Hospital Aintree, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jorgen Vestbo
3Division of Infection, Immunity and Respiratory Medicine, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Jorgen Vestbo
Malin Fageras
4Astra-Zeneca, Gothenburg, Sweden
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Alberto de la Hoz
5Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Ingelheim am Rhein, Germany
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Enrica Bucchioni
6Chiesi, Parma, Italy
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Chris H. Compton
7GSK, Brentford, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Karen Mezzi
8Novartis Pharma AG, Basel, Switzerland
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jadwiga A. Wedzicha
1National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, London, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Impact of the UK lockdown on early COPD https://bit.ly/3laMsmi

To the Editor:

On 23 March 2020, the UK Government announced a nationwide lockdown in response to the COVID-19 epidemic, with people banned from leaving their homes except for essential journeys and exercise.

From the beginning, public health advice issued by the UK National Health Service (NHS) encouraged smokers to quit. This advice was based on studies that showed a five times greater risk infection of the respiratory tract by the influenza virus in smokers and that bacterial infection/pneumonia is twice as likely in those who smoke [1, 2]. Early data during the pandemic were inconclusive as to whether tobacco smoking or nicotine conferred increased susceptibility to COVID-19 infection or not, but infected smokers had poorer clinical outcomes [3].

Whether people living in the UK took the public health advice is unclear as mass survey data are contradictory. One early cross-sectional survey suggested that 12.2% of those who tried to quit in the 3 months prior to March 2020 were motivated by COVID-19 but this was not statistically tested [4]. Data from another survey during April 2020 showed no significant change in smoking behaviour, with 15.9% of people sampled smoking in the year prior to February 2020 compared to 17.0% of people surveyed in April 2020 [5], whilst another survey suggested that smokers were stress-smoking more since the pandemic [6]. Our aim was to describe smoking and other behaviours during a nationwide lockdown.

Participants enrolled in the British Lung Foundation Early COPD cohort were aged 30–45 years, current tobacco smokers with >10-pack-year smoking history, forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) ≥80% predicted and a body mass index <35 kg·m−2. They were scheduled to be seen face-to-face in clinic every 6 months for measurement of full lung function, completion of various questionnaires, and physical collection of blood and sputum samples, but during lockdown, telephone interviews were performed and written questionnaires returned as photographs attached to e-mails. Remote interviews took place between 16 April and 28 September 2020, and paired with the closest pre-pandemic visit.

By telephone, participants were asked about smoking habits, upper respiratory tract infection (URTIs) and lower respiratory tract infections (LRTIs). They were also sent the COPD Assessment Test (CAT), Leicester Cough Questionnaire, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale questionnaire, and questions 1 and 2 of the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) for diagnoses of chronic bronchitis [7, 8]. 27 participants did not return the questionnaires. Statistical comparisons were made by paired t-test or Wilcoxon matched pairs test; comparisons between groups were made by Mann–Whitney and Chi-squared tests as appropriate. Remote telephone visits were approved by a nonsubstantial amendment to the ethics approval (London-Riverside Research Ethics Committee, 16LO2041).

Data were obtained during lockdown between the 16 April and 25 September 2020 from 260 individuals (25 participants in Belfast, 38 in Birmingham, 25 in Edinburgh, 101 in London, 27 in Manchester and 44 in Nottingham). The mean±sd age was 38.1±4.6 years (n=259), 155 (59.6%) were male and the post-bronchodilator FEV1 at enrolment was 3.81±0.8 L (101±11% of Global Lung Function Initiative predicted). The interval between the two visits was 196 days (interquartile range (IQR) 80–238 days).

Figure 1 demonstrates that during lockdown, the proportion of participants recorded as having stopped smoking for at least a week doubled from 31 (12.0%) out of 259 prior to lockdown to 62 (23.9%) out of 259 (Chi-squared p<0.001) during lockdown. Smoking habit data were available at both visits for 258 participants; 40 had stopped, nine restarted and 209 participant's habits were unchanged. Of these 209, 187 continued to smoke and 22 had already quit. In those who smoked before and during lockdown, assessed over the 7 days preceding each visit, tobacco consumption (cigarettes per day; Wilcoxon p = 0.587) and rolling tobacco (grams per week; Wilcoxon p = 0.924) was unchanged.

FIGURE 1
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIGURE 1

The proportion of nonsmoking participants, frequency of upper respiratory tract infections, and depression and anxiety scores before and during lockdown in the UK during the COVID-19 pandemic.

During lockdown, the anxiety component scores increased from 6.7±4.4 to 7.4±4.7) (n = 233; t-test p = 0.010) and depression scores increased from 4.30±3.9 to 5.14±4.1) (n = 233; t-test p<0.001). Anxiety increased in 78 out of 233 and depression in 89 out of 233 participants by ≥2 units, the minimally important difference in COPD [9].

Respiratory symptoms improved during lockdown, with CAT scores falling from 9 (IQR 6–15) to 8 (IQR 5–13) (n = 233; Wilcoxon p = 0.008) and the total Leicester Cough Questionnaire score indicating improvement, as it increased from 19.7 (IQR 17.6–20.6) to 20.0 (IQR 18.7–20.8) (n = 204; Wilcoxon p = 0.045).

A comparison of the 40 patients who quit during lockdown with those 187 who smoked at both visits showed no difference prior to lock down in CAT scores (Mann–Whitney p = 0.814) or in the prevalence of chronic as bronchitis defined by the SGRQ (Chi-squared p = 0.607). However, after quitting, CAT scores were lower (5 (IQR 3–13) compared with 9 (IQR 6–13)) in smokers (Mann–Whitney p = 0.0307) and chronic bronchitis less prevalent (four (11.8%) out of 34) than in those who continued to smoke (47 (28.1%) out of 167) (Chi-squared p = 0.045).

The number of URTIs recalled by the participants fell from a median of 1 (IQR 0–2; group mean 1.24) when asked pre-pandemic to a median 1 (IQR 0–1; group mean 0.84) (Wilcoxon p = 0.0002) when asked during lockdown. There was no difference in the number of LRTIs (Wilcoxon p = 0.192).

In summary, during the UK national lockdown and a period of enforced social distancing, there was a significant increase in the proportion of 30–45-year-old smokers who quit smoking despite increased levels of depression and anxiety. It has been reported that depressed individuals are more likely to be nicotine dependent but paradoxically, older depressed adults coupled with health concerns are more motivated to quit [10]. Stress may have enhanced lockdown as an important moment at which to quit. One limitation in our study is the absence of objective measures of nicotine use. However, participants who self-reported that they had quit smoking had a reduced prevalence of chronic bronchitis and lower CAT scores, which suggests they were truthful about their habits. There was also a reduced number of URTIs, again suggestive that participants had fewer social interactions and opportunities for cross-infection.

Our findings suggest that any evaluation of the health response to the pandemic needs to balance deterioration in mental health in specific age groups with improvements in respiratory health.

Footnotes

  • Provenance: Submitted article, peer reviewed.

  • BLF Early COPD Partnership: G.C. Donaldson, A.I. Ritchie, F. McLean, L. Moreira (both Imperial College London, London, UK), B. King (University of Belfast, Belfast, UK), K.P. Yip (University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK), A.S. Beech, A. Bikov (both University of Manchester, Manchester, UK), S. Ferguson (University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK), C.W. Kong (University of Southhampton, Southampton, UK), C. Holmes (University of Manchester, Manchester, UK), A.R. Jenkins (University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK), A. Deans (University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK), M. Fageras, A. de la Hoz, E. Bucchioni, C. Compton, A. Hamblin, A. Mackay (AstraZeneca), M. Kots (Chiesi), K. Mezzi, D. Mohan (GSK), I. Bottoli (Novartis), I. Jarrod, N.Snell (both British Heart Foundation, London, UK), E. Hoffman, J. Atha (both University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA), J. Allinson (Imperial College London, London, UK), C.E. Bolton (University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK), P.M.A. Calverley, G. Choudhury (University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK), L. McGarvey (University of Belfast, Belfast, UK), E. Sapey (University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK), T.M.A. Wilkinson (University of Southampton, Southampton, UK), J. Vestbo and J.A. Wedzicha.

  • Conflict of interest: G.C. Donaldson reports grants from AstraZeneca, and personal fees from AstraZeneca, the American Thoracic Society, FWO Flanders and Novartis, outside the submitted work.

  • Conflict of interest: A.I. Ritchie has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: P.M.A. Calverley reports grants and personal fees from GlaxoSmithKline, personal fees from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Phillips Respironics, Novartis, Recipharm and Zambon, and personal fees and nonfinancial support from Boehringer Ingelheim outside the submitted work.

  • Conflict of interest: J. Vestbo reports personal fees from AstraZeneca and Boehringer Ingelheim, grants from Boehringer Ingelheim, and personal fees from Chiesi, GSK, Novartis and TEVA, outside the submitted work.

  • Conflict of interest: M. Fageras has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: A. de la Hoz reports a salary from Boehringer Ingelheim International.

  • Conflict of interest: E. Bucchioni is an employee of Chiesi.

  • Conflict of interest: C.H. Compton is an employee of and holds shares in GSK.

  • Conflict of interest: K. Mezzi is a Novartis Pharma AG employee.

  • Conflict of interest: J.A. Wedzicha reports grants from GSK, meeting expenses only (no personal fees since January 2015) from Novartis, Boehringer Ingelheim and AstraZeneca, and a grant from Chiesi outside the submitted work.

  • Support statement: The study is funded by AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cheisi, GSK and Novartis. Funding information for this article has been deposited with the Crossref Funder Registry.

  • Received June 11, 2021.
  • Accepted September 29, 2021.
  • Copyright ©The authors 2021
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

This version is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial Licence 4.0. For commercial reproduction rights and permissions contact permissions{at}ersnet.org

References

  1. ↵
    1. Arcavi L,
    2. Benowitz NL
    . Cigarette smoking and infection. Arch Intern Med 2004; 164: 2206–2216. doi:10.1001/archinte.164.20.2206
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. ↵
    1. Stämpfli MR,
    2. Anderson GP
    . How cigarette smoke skews immune responses to promote infection, lung disease and cancer. Nat Rev Immunol 2009; 9: 377–384. doi:10.1038/nri2530
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. ↵
    1. Vardavas CI,
    2. Nikitara K
    . Covid-19 and smoking: a systematic review of the evidence. Tob Induc Dis 2020; 18: 20. doi:10.18332/tid/119324
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. ↵
    1. Tattan-Birch H,
    2. Perski O,
    3. Jackson S, et al.
    Covid-19, smoking, vaping and quitting: a representative population survey in England. Addiction 2021; 116: 1186–1195. doi:10.1111/add.15251
    OpenUrl
  5. ↵
    1. Jackson SE,
    2. Garnett C,
    3. Shahab L, et al.
    Association of the COVID-19 lockdown with smoking, drinking and attempts to quit in England: an analysis of 2019–20 data. Addiction 2021; 116: 1233–1244. doi:10.1111/add.15295
    OpenUrl
  6. ↵
    1. Mintel Press Office
    . Panic puffs: half of smokers are stress-smoking more since the pandemic started. https://www.mintel.com/press-centre/social-and-lifestyle/panic-puffs-half-of-smokers-are-stress-smoking-more-since-the-pandemic-started. Date last updated: 15 April 2021.
  7. ↵
    1. Kim V,
    2. Zhao H,
    3. Regan E, et al.
    The St. George's respiratory questionnaire definition of chronic bronchitis may be a better predictor of COPD exacerbations compared with the classic definition. Chest 2019; 156: 685–695. doi:10.1016/j.chest.2019.03.041
    OpenUrlPubMed
  8. ↵
    1. Kim V,
    2. Crapo J,
    3. Zhao H, et al.
    Comparison between an alternative and the classic definition of chronic bronchitis in COPDgene. Ann Am Thorac Soc 2015; 12: 332–339. doi:10.1513/AnnalsATS.201411-518OC
    OpenUrlPubMed
  9. ↵
    1. Wynne SC,
    2. Patel S,
    3. Barker RE, et al.
    Anxiety and depression in bronchiectasis: response to pulmonary rehabilitation and minimal clinically important difference of the hospital anxiety and depression scale. Chron Respir Dis 2020; 17: 1479973120933292. doi:10.1177/1479973120933292
    OpenUrl
  10. ↵
    1. Sachs-Ericsson N,
    2. Schmidt NB,
    3. Zvolensky MJ, et al.
    Smoking cessation behavior in older adults by race and gender: The role of health problems and psychological distress. Nicotine Tob Res 2009; 11: 433–443. doi:10.1093/ntr/ntp002
    OpenUrlPubMed
PreviousNext
Back to top
Vol 7 Issue 4 Table of Contents
ERJ Open Research: 7 (4)
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on European Respiratory Society .

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Impact of the UK lockdown on people at risk of COPD
(Your Name) has sent you a message from European Respiratory Society
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the European Respiratory Society web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Print
Citation Tools
Impact of the UK lockdown on people at risk of COPD
Gavin C. Donaldson, Andrew I. Ritchie, Peter M.A. Calverley, Jorgen Vestbo, Malin Fageras, Alberto de la Hoz, Enrica Bucchioni, Chris H. Compton, Karen Mezzi, Jadwiga A. Wedzicha
ERJ Open Research Oct 2021, 7 (4) 00358-2021; DOI: 10.1183/23120541.00358-2021

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Impact of the UK lockdown on people at risk of COPD
Gavin C. Donaldson, Andrew I. Ritchie, Peter M.A. Calverley, Jorgen Vestbo, Malin Fageras, Alberto de la Hoz, Enrica Bucchioni, Chris H. Compton, Karen Mezzi, Jadwiga A. Wedzicha
ERJ Open Research Oct 2021, 7 (4) 00358-2021; DOI: 10.1183/23120541.00358-2021
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Technorati logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Connotea logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
Full Text (PDF)

Jump To

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Subjects

  • COPD and smoking
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

More in this TOC Section

  • Vitamin D replacement in children with acute wheeze
  • Urinary bicarbonate and metabolic alkalosis in CF
  • Probiotics for asthmatic children
Show more Research letters

Related Articles

Navigate

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • Archive

About ERJ Open Research

  • Editorial board
  • Journal information
  • Press
  • Permissions and reprints
  • Advertising

The European Respiratory Society

  • Society home
  • myERS
  • Privacy policy
  • Accessibility

ERS publications

  • European Respiratory Journal
  • ERJ Open Research
  • European Respiratory Review
  • Breathe
  • ERS books online
  • ERS Bookshop

Help

  • Feedback

For authors

  • Instructions for authors
  • Publication ethics and malpractice
  • Submit a manuscript

For readers

  • Alerts
  • Subjects
  • RSS

Subscriptions

  • Accessing the ERS publications

Contact us

European Respiratory Society
442 Glossop Road
Sheffield S10 2PX
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 114 2672860
Email: journals@ersnet.org

ISSN

Online ISSN: 2312-0541

Copyright © 2022 by the European Respiratory Society