Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a major public health problem, accounting for 23% of intubated patients and associated with high mortality rates. Although lifesaving, invasive mechanical ventilation can worsen lung injury when ventilator settings are poorly adjusted to lung physiology. We hypothesise that individualising ventilator settings via (1) the bedside assessment of lung recruitability using a one-breath derecruitment manoeuvre and measurement of airway opening pressure to set positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP), (2) controlling the distending pressure and (3) controlling respiratory drive improves ARDS outcomes.

The CAreful Ventilation In ARDS trial is an investigator-led multicentre (33 centres in eight countries), open-label, randomised controlled basket trial comparing two ventilation strategies in two subpopulations of moderate-to-severe ARDS: induced or not by COVID-19. A total of 740 patients will be randomised (370 in each substudy) in a 1:1 ratio to individualised ventilator settings or to using traditional PEEP to inspired fraction of oxygen tables for PEEP setting. Indications for proning and weaning strategies are similar in both arms. The primary outcome is all-cause mortality at day 60. Secondary outcomes include duration of mechanical ventilation, duration of intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital stay, organ dysfunction, barotrauma and mortality in ICU, at day 28 and in hospital.

Ethics approval has been obtained for all participating centres: Unity Health Toronto Research Ethics Board (for three centres: St Michael’s Hospital, Toronto General Hospital and Toronto Western Hospital); Comité de Ética de Investigación con Medicamentos del Hospital Universitari Vall d’Hebron; Comité de protection des personnes Ile de France III; Comité d'Ética de la Investigatción con Medicamentos de la Fundació de Gestió Sanitària del Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau; Comitato Etico—Fondazione Policlinico Gemelli; Comitato Etico di Area Vasta Emilia Centro; NYU Langone Health Institutional Review Board; Comité Ético Científico de Ciencias de la Salud; Il Comitato Etico Area 1 dell’Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria ‘Ospedali Riuniti’ di Foggia; HIGA ‘Eva Perón’ Comité de Bioética; Comité de Revisión Institucional del Hospital Británico Comité de Ética en Investigación; Complejo Médico Churruca-Visca Comité de Ética Biomédica; Comité de Ética SATI Comité de Ética en Investigación; Comité de Ética en Investigación del CEMIC; Comité de Ética SATI Comité de Ética en Investigación; Medical Research Ethics Committees United. Findings will be disseminated in peer review journals and conference presentations.

NCT03963622.

Cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) are the leading cause of death worldwide, making the development of self-management strategies crucial for preventing complications and improving clinical outcomes. This process involves symptom monitoring, treatment adherence, emotional management and a healthy lifestyle, among others. Reliable instruments are necessary to measure self-management, requiring robust psychometric properties. In this way, this COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN)-based systematic review aims to assess the quality of specific self-management instruments for adults with CVDs.

This systematic review will follow the COSMIN and be reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Protocol. Searches will be conducted in seven databases: MEDLINE, Web of Science, Scopus, PsycINFO, EMBASE and CINAHL. Additionally, a manual search will be performed on PROQOLID, PROMIS and The Medical Outcome Trust websites. Studies on the development and validation of patient-reported instruments measuring specific self-management for individuals with CVDs will be included, without language or date restrictions. The search will be performed in November 2025, with the final version of the review expected to be completed in October 2026. Data extraction will follow COSMIN recommendations. The Modified Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach will be used to determine the quality of evidence. Instruments will be categorised according to COSMIN recommendations. All steps will be conducted by two independent reviewers, with a third reviewer involved in case of discrepancies. Additionally, the content of the instruments will be analysed and linked to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health, following international recommendations.

This study does not require ethics committee approval as it is a review of published data. The review results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journal publications and presentations at scientific conferences.

CRD42024605969.

Post-COVID-19 conditions (PCC) may include pulmonary sequelae, fatigue and other symptoms, but its mechanisms are not fully elucidated.

This study investigated the correlation between fatigue and the presence of pulmonary abnormalities in PCC patients with respiratory involvement 6–12 months after hospitalisation.

Cross-sectional study.

A tertiary hospital in Brazil.

315 patients, aged ≥18 years, were considered eligible based on SARS-CoV-2 infection confirmed by reverse transcription-PCR.

Pulmonary function tests (PFT), cardiopulmonary exercise tests (CPET), chest CT and hand grip were performed. The following scales were applied: Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F) scale, Euroqol 5 Dimensions quality of life (EQ-5D) and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). Participants were divided between the fatigue group (FACIT-F≤30) and the non-fatigue group (FACIT-F>30). For the statistical analysis, the primary outcome was the difference in the diffusing capacity of the lungs for carbon monoxide (DLCO) between groups. Considered secondary outcomes were differences in PFT, CPET, chest CT, hand grip, EQ-5D and HADS.

The fatigue group had 81 patients (25.7%) against 234 (74.3%). PFT and CPET showed no significant difference in DLCO and oxygen consumption peak values between groups. The fatigue group had a lower workload (mean 55.3±21.3 watts vs 66.5±23.2 watts, p=0.003), higher breathing reserve (median 41.9% (33.8–52.5) vs 37.7% (28.9–47.1), p=0.028) and lower prevalence of ground glass opacity (60.8% vs 77.7%, p=0.003) and reticulation (36.7% vs 54.9%, p=0.005) in chest CT. The fatigue group had higher anxiety (57% vs 24%, p

Fatigue in patients with PCC 6–12 months after hospitalisation is relatively common and had weak correlation with pulmonary disorders. Our results suggested fatigue could be strongly related with peripheral disorders such as reduced musculoskeletal strength or psychosocial limitations.