What are the opening hours?

Monday 9am - 5pm Tuesday 9am - 5pm Wednesday 9am - 5pm Thursday 9am - 5pm Friday 9am - 5pm

RespiratoryRecon, 1712 Commercial Drive, Naples, FL (2026)

06/04/2026

GLP-1s and Asthma: More Than Weight Loss

Using a GLP-1 for obesity or diabetes and seeing fewer asthma flares was not on most clinicians’ bingo cards for 2026.

New data from a Danish nationwide self-controlled cohort of 27,523 adults with asthma and comorbid overweight, obesity, or type 2 diabetes reports a 26 percent reduction in asthma exacerbations after GLP-1 receptor agonist initiation compared with the prior year. This signal was consistent whether the GLP-1 was prescribed for obesity or for diabetes, and across patients with and without allergic rhinitis.

Reliever use dropped by 14 percent, inhaled corticosteroid exposure fell by 23 percent, and pneumonia events decreased by 10 percent over the same period. For a working asthma population, that is fewer bursts of systemic steroids, fewer emergency visits, and potentially a lower cumulative steroid burden over time.

Even though individual BMI and weight-loss data were not available in this registry analysis, the pattern reinforces what is seen clinically: when obesity and metabolic dysfunction improve, dyspnea, rescue use, and exacerbation burden often follow.

At the bedside, this nudges the conversation beyond inhaler technique and step-up therapy alone. For patients with asthma plus obesity or type 2 diabetes who are already candidates for GLP-1 therapy, these data support more deliberate collaboration between respiratory, endocrine, and primary care teams when discussing treatment options and goals.

Key Takeaways
* GLP-1 receptor agonists were associated with a 26% reduction in asthma exacerbations in adults with asthma and obesity or type 2 diabetes.
* Rescue inhaler use, ICS exposure, & pneumonia events all decreased after GLP-1 initiation
* For eligible patients, GLP-1 therapy may offer dual benefits: cardiometabolic risk reduction & meaningful improvement in asthma outcomes

Source: European Association for the Study of Obesity. “GLP-1 weight loss medications linked to significant drop in asthma flares.” News-Medical, May 15, 2026.

06/03/2026

Exercise Intensity Is the Prescription We Keep Underdosing

More than 4% vigorous activity cut chronic disease risk by up to 61%.

The conversation in pulmonary rehabilitation has long focused on duration and frequency or how many minutes, how many sessions per week. A study published in the European Heart Journal challenges that framing in a way that should land in every rehabilitation program's design conversation.

Researchers analyzed accelerometer data from 96,408 participants and self-reported activity data from 375,730 more. The question they asked wasn't just how much physical activity prevents disease, but what kind. Specifically, what proportion of that activity is vigorous.

Adjusting for total physical activity volume, participants with more than 4% vigorous physical activity had 29 to 61% lower risk across eight chronic disease outcomes compared with those reporting no vigorous activity. For chronic respiratory disease specifically, intensity accounted for 21.4% of the risk reduction....

More than four times the contribution of volume alone (5.6%)

In pulmonary rehab, we often default to moderate-intensity protocols because they're safer to initiate and easier to tolerate. That's clinically sound for early stages. But this data argues that if our goal is long-term disease risk reduction and not just functional improvement, intensity needs to be part of the prescription conversation, not an afterthought.

For patients who can tolerate it, the question isn't whether to add vigorous intervals. It's when and how.

KEY TAKEAWAYS
* Intensity Drives Reduction.
* Respiratory Disease Is Intensity-Sensitive.
* Personalize the Prescription.

Source: Wei J, et al. Proportion of Vigorous Physical Activity and Chronic Disease Risk. European Heart Journal. Published online March 29, 2026. Summarized in: Pulmonology Advisor. April 13, 2026.

05/28/2026

COPD Inhaler Device Type Changes Outcomes — Not Just the Drug

Same active ingredients, different delivery and dry powder pulls ahead by a meaningful margin.

For years, the clinical conversation around COPD inhaler therapy has focused on drug class selection. Researchers at UCLA used a large commercial insurance and Medicare Advantage database to compare outcomes among new LAMA-LABA users prescribed three different inhaler types — dry powder (umeclidinium-vilanterol), metered-dose (glycopyrrolate-formoterol), and soft mist (tiotropium-olodaterol). Using propensity score matching, the analysis examined time to first moderate or severe COPD exacerbation.

The results favored the dry powder inhaler. The lead researcher noted this is the second consecutive study showing a dry powder advantage — the first in ICS-LAMA-LABA combinations, now replicated in LAMA-LABA alone. The consistency across two separate patient populations is difficult to dismiss.

Device selection in COPD is not a secondary consideration. For patients at risk for exacerbation, it may be one of the highest-yield decisions we make at the point of prescribing.

Takeaway 1: Among new LAMA-LABA users with COPD, dry powder inhalers were associated with a 14% lower risk for first moderate or severe exacerbation compared with metered-dose inhalers, with a number needed to treat of 17.

Takeaway 2: Soft mist inhalers showed intermediate performance — better than metered-dose but less favorable than dry powder — suggesting a meaningful hierarchy in device effectiveness within the same drug class.

Takeaway 3: Cardiovascular events, UTIs, and pneumonia rates were comparable across all three devices, reinforcing that the exacerbation reduction with dry powder reflects clinical effectiveness rather than safety differences.

Source: Portela GT, et al. *JAMA Internal Medicine. 2026. Reported via Healio, March 18, 2026.

05/26/2026

Inhaler adherence is often poorer than it appears, and the choice of assessment tool can change what clinicians uncover. This short read explores the Morisky-Green test and the TAI, comparing what each one tells us, where each falls short, and whether the extra effort of a more detailed assessment is truly worth it.

Estimated reading time: 2 minutes.

http://tiny.cc/AdherenceScore

05/24/2026

1 Inhaler, 12 Months, Real Difference

Annual exacerbation rates fell from 93% to 64% on triple therapy.

Pooled analysis of 6 prospective European observational studies adds practical weight to single-inhaler triple therapy. Extrafine beclomethasone dipropionate, formoterol fumarate, and glycopyrronium bromide were evaluated across more than 5,000 adults with COPD already navigating real-world disease severity.

The exacerbation signal was the most striking. In the year before initiation, 93.1% of participants experienced =>1 exacerbation. After 12 months on single-inhaler triple therapy, proportion dropped to 64.3%. At 3 months, 91.1 % of patients were exacerbation-free.

QOL moved with it. 65% had clinical improvements in CAT scores at 3 months, climbing to 68.5% at 6 months. FEV1 rose an average of 65 mL at 3 months & held into month 6, with roughly 40 % of patients gaining at least 100 mL.

Consolidating ICS, LABA, and LAMA into a single delivery device removes a quiet driver of treatment failure. Every additional inhaler is an opportunity for technique error, missed doses, & timing drift. A single device with one rhythm meets patients where their attention and dexterity actually live.

This is not a starter therapy. It belongs to patients who continue to flare or remain symptomatic on optimized dual therapy.

KEY TAKEAWAYS
* Real-World Confirmation Matters. 5,000 patients reproduced the exacerbation and lung function gains seen in tightly controlled trials.
* Device Burden Is A Treatment Variable. Consolidating 3 molecules into 1 inhaler reduces technique error & missed doses, both invisible drivers of poor outcomes.
* Reserve, But Do Not Delay. Single-inhaler triple therapy belongs after optimized dual maintenance, yet earlier escalation in clearly symptomatic patients may prevent the next exacerbation rather than chase it.

Source: Pooled analysis of single-inhaler extrafine BDP/FF/GB triple therapy in COPD. Respiratory Medicine. 2026. As reported by Pulmonology Advisor (Stong C), April 7, 2026.

05/23/2026

Unsured and Still Skipping Inhalers

Most patients who skip COPD inhalers because of cost still have insurance.

A new analysis of 2,521 adults from the COPD Genetic Epidemiology study draws a hard line under something many of us see weekly. 16% reported cost-related non-adherence to their inhalers. Of that group, 93.5 % had health insurance, with most carrying Medicare or private coverage. Insurance, in other words, did not translate to affordability.

The downstream signal was unambiguous. After adjustment for age, s*x, race, smoking, lung function at baseline, and asthma history, patients with cost-related non-adherence had a 6-minute walk distance that was 65 feet shorter and an FEV1 that was 133 mL lower than peers without cost barriers. COPD Assessment Test scores ran 2.6 points higher and St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire scores 8 points higher, both crossing minimum clinically important difference thresholds. The BODE Index moved in the same direction.

This study quantifies the gap between a prescription written and a prescription filled. The clinician time spent matching molecule to formulary is invisible, and patients pay for that complexity in worse symptoms and lung function.

Affordability needs to be a vital sign at every inhaler conversation. Embedded pharmacy support, formulary-aware prescribing, and direct conversations about cost are no longer niceties. They are part of treatment efficacy.

KEY TAKEAWAYS
* Insurance Is Not Affordability. 9 in 10 patients reporting cost-related non-adherence had coverage. Coverage and access are not synonyms in COPD care.
* Outcomes Track Cost Burden. Cost-related nonadherence aligned with worse 6MWD, FEV1, CAT, SGRQ, and BODE scores in a multivariable analysis.
* Cost Belongs In The Prescribing Conversation. Asking about affordability before sending the prescription often beats troubleshooting nonadherence after the fact.

SOURCE: Suri R, et al. Cost-Related Nonadherence and Outcomes in Adults with COPD. Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Diseases: Journal of the COPD Foundation. 2026.

05/22/2026

COPD Without a Single Cigarette?

Never-smokers with COPD looked less like smokers and more like asthma overlap.

Not every patient with airflow obstruction has a pack-year history. In a Swedish population-based cohort, investigators characterized 154 never-smokers with COPD and compared them against never-smokers with normal lung function, current smokers, ex-smokers with COPD, and current smokers with COPD.

The picture that emerged is clinically distinct. Never-smokers with COPD reported more respiratory symptoms and poorer health status than healthy peers. Compared with ever-smokers with COPD, they generally had milder disease but carried a different inflammatory fingerprint: higher aeroallergen sensitization, higher fractional exhaled nitric oxide, and higher blood eosinophil counts. They also reported more asthma.

The interesting part is what happened when participants with self-reported asthma were excluded. Type 2 inflammation signal: wheeze, cough, and elevated FeNO persisted. That argues this phenotype is not simply mislabeled asthma. It looks like its own thing.

This reframes a frequent clinical reflex. A never-smoker with an FEV1/FVC below lower limit of normal is often treated as a diagnostic oddity or an atypical asthma case. Data suggest a more useful frame: consider a distinct COPD phenotype driven partly by type 2 inflammation, with monitoring and treatment implications that may differ from classic smoking-related disease.

KEY TAKEAWAYS
* Never-smoker COPD is real and distinct. Treat it as its own phenotype, not a mild version of smoking-related disease.
* Phenotype the inflammation. FeNO and blood eosinophils should be part of the workup when COPD shows up without a smoking history.
* Match therapy to biology. Type 2 features raise the question of ICS-containing regimens and, in selected patients, broader anti-inflammatory strategies rather than bronchodilator-only care.

SOURCE: Sönnerfors P, et al. Characterisation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in never-smokers and ever-smokers from a population-based cohort. BMJ Open Respiratory Research. 2026;13(1):e003578.

05/15/2026

Three Smart ‘Beans’ That Could Change How We Breathe

In respiratory care, we’ve spent years perfecting molecules and mechanics but we still lose ground where it matters most. How therapies are used in real life. Smart respiratory technologies are finally giving us a chance to close that gap.

In my latest article, I use a fable "Jack and the Beans of Breath" to explore how connected, smart devices can act like three powerful “beans” for ambulatory respiratory therapies: aerosol delivery, respiratory muscle training, and airway clearance.

Bean 1: Adherence. Smart inhalers, trainers, and airway clearance systems can automatically capture use patterns, push context-aware reminders, and share meaningful trends instead of raw timestamps—turning adherence from a guess into a guided habit.

Bean 2: Technique. Devices that sense flow, volume, and pressure in real time can coach each breath with visual and haptic feedback, closing the gap between prescribed therapy and how it’s actually performed.

Bean 3: Connection. Remote monitoring platforms can stream these signals back to clinicians and care teams, enabling early intervention, personalization, and continuous optimization of respiratory plans instead of episodic course corrections.

The story ends on a moonlit medtech stage, where these three “beans” grow into a living beanstalk of data, crowned by a Guardian of Breath—a reminder that the goal isn’t more dashboards, it’s more protected lungs.

If our devices aren’t actively growing adherence, technique, and connection, they’re just hardware—when they should be guardians of every breath.

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/jack-beans-breath-timothy-myers-vs0bf

05/12/2026

What Your Asthma Score Consistently Misses

The ACQ-5 is a reliable tool but it misses more than most clinicians realize.

The ACQ-5 has earned its place in asthma management. Five questions, a practical symptom burden score, a quick read on disease control. But a study published in BMC Pulmonary Medicine raises a question worth sitting with: what exactly is the ACQ-5 capturing & what is it leaving behind?

Retrospective cross-sectional analysis assessed airflow limitation patterns — normal lung function, isolated small airway dysfunction (iSAD), & overt airflow limitation (AFL) — alongside T2 inflammatory phenotype using spirometry & biomarkers.

Higher ACQ-5 scores strongly associated with overt airflow limitation, correlating moderately with FEV1 & FEF25-75 % predicted.

Gaps? About 48% of patients had T2-high inflammation — the phenotype most relevant to biologic therapy eligibility. ACQ-5 was a poor discriminator for this group. Equally limited in detecting isolated small airway dysfunction.

In a treatment landscape where biologics are available but consistently underutilized, missing T2-high phenotype at initial assessment has real consequences. A patient with high symptom burden and undetected eosinophilic inflammation may receive escalating step therapy when a targeted biologic would be the more appropriate choice.

Authors frame it that the ACQ-5 is a complementary tool, not a comprehensive one.

KEY TAKEAWAYS
* ACQ-5 reliably identifies overt airflow limitation but is a poor discriminator for T2-high phenotype and isolated small airway dysfunction.
* Nearly half of treatment-naïve uncontrolled asthma patients in this cohort had T2-high inflammation, yet symptom scores alone failed to identify most of them. Phenotyping must accompany symptom assessment.
* Point-of-care tools such as FeNO testing and advanced spirometry should be integrated into primary care evaluations for uncontrolled asthma to bridge the gap between symptom burden and underlying airway biology.

SOURCE: Stong C. "ACQ-5 Identifies Overt Airflow Limitation in Treatment-Naïve Uncontrolled Asthma." Pulmonology Advisor. March 23, 2026. Study published in BMC Pulmonary Medicine.

05/05/2026

Air Purifiers in COPD and Asthma: What Clinicians Should Really Know

Most of your patients spend 90% of their day indoors, breathing air they assume is safer than what’s outside. Yet for people with COPD and asthma, the home environment can quietly drive symptoms, exacerbations, and unscheduled visits. This article is a 4‑minute read that unpacks what the evidence actually says about home air purifiers—where they help, where they disappoint, and how to set realistic expectations when patients inevitably ask, “Should I buy one?”

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/air-purifiers-copd-asthma-timothy-myers-q89cf

RespiratoryRecon

06/04/2026

06/03/2026

05/28/2026

05/26/2026

05/24/2026

05/23/2026

05/22/2026

05/15/2026

05/12/2026

05/05/2026

Address

Opening Hours

Website

Alerts

Contact The Business

Shortcuts

Share

Category

Monday	9am - 5pm
Tuesday	9am - 5pm
Wednesday	9am - 5pm
Thursday	9am - 5pm
Friday	9am - 5pm