loading page

A feasibility trial of a digital breathing exercise intervention for adolescents with asthma
  • +9
  • Stephanie Easton,
  • Ben Ainsworth,
  • Mike Thomas,
  • Susan Latter,
  • Rebecca Knibb,
  • Amber Cook,
  • Sam Wilding,
  • Michael Bahrami-Hessari,
  • Erika Kennington,
  • Denise Gibson,
  • Hannah Wilkins,
  • Graham Roberts
Stephanie Easton
University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust

Corresponding Author:s.e.easton@soton.ac.uk

Author Profile
Ben Ainsworth
University of Southampton School of Psychology
Author Profile
Mike Thomas
University of Southampton School of Primary Care Population Science and Medical Education
Author Profile
Susan Latter
University of Southampton School of Health Sciences
Author Profile
Rebecca Knibb
Aston University School of Psychology
Author Profile
Amber Cook
University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust
Author Profile
Sam Wilding
University of Southampton
Author Profile
Michael Bahrami-Hessari
University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust
Author Profile
Erika Kennington
Asthma and Lung UK
Author Profile
Denise Gibson
University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust
Author Profile
Hannah Wilkins
University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust
Author Profile
Graham Roberts
University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust
Author Profile

Abstract

Background Many adolescents with asthma have dysfunctional breathing and poor quality of life. Breathing retraining is recommended for symptom management and breathing efficiency. This trial evaluated the feasibility of conducting a definitive trial to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a digital breathing retraining intervention for adolescents with asthma (Breathe4T – a mobile-friendly website). Specifically, recruitment, follow-up response rates, acceptability and uptake of the intervention and measures, as well as agreement between two quality of life questionnaires were measured. Methods Adolescents (12-17 years) with asthma and impaired quality of life were recruited via UK primary and secondary care clinics and randomised into two, unblinded groups. The intervention group accessed Breathe4T for 6 months whilst the control group gained access after 6 months. Measures included quality of life (paediatric asthma quality of life questionnaire and paediatric quality of life short form), asthma control (asthma control test), healthcare utilisation and demographics at baseline, 2 and 6 months. Website data and interviews explored experiences of the intervention. Results 64 adolescents were randomised. At 2 months 30.2% of participants returned data, however telephone calls improved the rate to 70.3% at 6-month follow-up Breathing retraining was acceptable to adolescents and was perceived to have various benefits. Conclusions The study demonstrates acceptability and feasibility of a future definitive trial to evaluate effectiveness and impacts of a breathing retraining website on quality of life. Implications for recruitment and maximising follow up rates were identified. These learnings are likely to be applicable to other adolescent studies.