Adults with asthma who also had laryngeal hypersensitivity had a greater symptom burden during the 2019 to 2020 landscape fires in Australia, according to a study published in The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology: In Practice.
These symptoms persisted months after the fires were over as well, Anne E. Vertigan, PhD, conjoint associate professor in the School of Medicine and Public Health at University of Newcastle, and colleagues wrote in the study.
The cross-sectional study involved 240 adults (median age, 64 years; 60% women) with asthma who were continuously exposed to landscape fire smoke between Oct. 1, 2019, and Feb. 29, 2020. Participants completed surveys a median of 48 days after the landscape fire period.
The median score on the Newcastle Laryngeal Hypersensitivity Questionnaire (LHQ) was 17.5 (interquartile range [IQR], 15.5-19.5), with 49 participants (20.4%) indicating laryngeal hypersensitivity based on LHQ scores of less than 15. The median LHQ scores for these participants was 12.4 (IQR, 10.6-14.1).
During the landscape fire days, mean exposures to particulate matter at the 2.5 µg scale (PM2.5) ranged from 10.6 µg/m3 to 19.9 µg/m3, with a mean of 30 (standard deviation [SD], 18) fire days throughout the fire period.
With 82% of participants reporting asthma symptoms during the fire period, 135 (56%) believed these symptoms were due to smoke from the fires.
A greater proportion of participants with vs. without laryngeal hypersensitivity reported asthma symptoms (96% vs. 79%; P = .003) and exacerbations (71% vs. 47%; P = .002) during the fire period. They also more frequently reported cough (78% vs. 43%) and throat irritation (71% vs. 38%: P < .001 for both), the researchers found.
Also, 65% of those with laryngeal hypersensitivity and 38% of those without used oral corticosteroids for an exacerbation (P = .001).
Asthma symptoms also had a greater impact on participants with laryngeal hypersensitivity, the researchers continued, with a greater proportion of the laryngeal hypersensitivity group reporting reduced capacity to take part in usual activities (88% vs. 59%; P < .001), absenteeism from school or work (27% vs. 9%: P = .003) or cancellation of sports or social engagements (55% vs. 31%; P =. 003 for both) during the fire period.
Results were similar during the follow-up period between 2 and 3 months after the fires had ended, the researchers found.
Specifically, a greater proportion of the laryngeal hypersensitivity group were awakened at night by their asthma symptoms (67% vs. 44%; P = .001) and reported throat irritation (47% vs. 18%) or cough (59% vs. 34%; P < .001 for both).
Also, those with laryngeal hypersensitivity were more likely to have uncontrolled asthma based on Global Initiative for Asthma guidelines (69% vs. 36%; adjusted OR = 7; 95% CI, 1.5-31.9).
Finally, participants with laryngeal hypersensitivity took a median of nine puffs of their reliever inhalers during the follow-up period, whereas those without laryngeal hypersensitivity took a median of 4.3 puffs (P < .001).
Based on these findings, the researchers said that the 20% of participants with laryngeal hypersensitivity had more asthma symptoms and health care use during the fire period as well as more symptoms, poorer asthma control and increased short-acting beta-agonist use during the follow-up period.
The researchers called for additional research to determine whether masks and filters could mitigate symptoms of laryngeal hypersensitivity during fire periods, among other strategies, including exposure avoidance.
Also, the researchers wrote, research should examine the effects of laryngeal hypersensitivity on people who have mild to moderate asthma with smoke exposure during fire periods. Still, the researchers suggested, management of laryngeal hypersensitivity during or immediately after these periods may mitigate the impact of asthma symptoms.