Article

Comparison of a network of primary care physicians and an open spirometry programme for COPD diagnosis

Respiratory Medicine Department, University of Thessaly Medical School, Larissa, Greece.
Respiratory medicine (Impact Factor: 2.92). 02/2011; 105(2):274-81. DOI: 10.1016/j.rmed.2010.06.020
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Early diagnosis of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) remains the cornerstone for effective management. In this study we compared an open spirometry programme and a case-finding programme providing spirometry to high-risk subjects selected by primary care physicians.
A network of primary care physicians was created after invitation and all participants received training on COPD and spirometry. The study team visited 12 primary care settings in each programme in a 1-year period. Spirometry was performed in all eligible participants. COPD diagnosis and classification was based on GOLD guidelines and evaluation by a chest physician.
Patients with acceptable spirometry were evaluated (n = 201 in the case-finding and n = 905 in the open spirometry programme). The proportion of newly diagnosed COPD was 27.9% in the case-finding programme compared to 8.4% in the open spirometry programme (p < 0.0001). The number needed-to-screen (NNS) for a new diagnosis of COPD was 3.6 in the case-finding programme compared to 11.9 in the open spirometry programme. The majority of newly diagnosed patients were classified in GOLD stages I an II. The average cost for a new diagnosis of COPD was 173 € in the open spirometry programme and 102 € in the case-finding programme.
A case-finding programme involving primary care physicians was more cost-effective for the identification of new cases of COPD compared to an open spirometry programme. The development of networks of primary care physicians with access to good quality spirometry and specialist consultation for early diagnosis of COPD is justified.

0 Followers
 · 
212 Views
  • Source
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) remains a significant cause of morbidity and mortality, with high rates of underdiagnosis. There are no studies about following up COPD patients in primary health care. The aim of the current study was to estimate two-year mortality for COPD patients in primary care and assess the parameters associated with mortality. A total of 263 patients with a new COPD diagnosis were followed up for two years. Follow-up included phone contacts every six months for assessment of vital status, and re-examination visits every year after the initial diagnosis. Visits included performance on spirometry, assessment of smoking status, evaluation of adherence with treatment, and assessment of the number of exacerbations during the previous year. One hundred and eighteen patients with COPD completed the study. The overall mortality was 27.9%. Most patients had quit smoking two years after the initial diagnosis, whereas the percentage of patients showing high adherence with treatment was 68%. Parameters associated with two-year mortality were age and coronary heart disease comorbidity. The mortality of patients with COPD in primary care remains significantly high, whereas adherence with treatment remains significant low. Age, smoking status, and a history of depression are major determinants of mortality in primary health care.
    International Journal of General Medicine 10/2012; 5:815-22. DOI:10.2147/IJGM.S27411
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Many patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are not identified until their condition is relatively advanced and there is a considerable gap between the modelled and diagnosed prevalence of the disease. We have previously shown that, in the first year after the introduction of a locally enhanced service (LES) for COPD in 2008, there was a significant step-up in the diagnosed prevalence. AIMS: To investigate whether this initial increase in prevalence was sustained, and the impact of this increase on future projected rates of COPD diagnosis. METHODS: Using data from 2005-2011, we compared the prevalence of diagnosed COPD in the LES Primary Care Trust (LES-PCT) before and after it was introduced. Data were compared with a neighbouring PCT, the London Strategic Health Authority, and England. The true prevalence of COPD was estimated based on data from the Health Survey for England. Trends were extrapolated to estimate the proportion of patients that would be diagnosed in 2017. RESULTS: The introduction of the LES was associated with a significant acceleration in the annual increase in diagnosed COPD (p<0.0001). By 2011 the prevalence was 1.17% in the LES-PCT compared with a predicted value of 0.91% (95% CI 0.86% to 0.95%) based on the pre-LES trend. There was no change in the rate of increase in COPD prevalence for the neighbouring PCT or for London as a whole. The LES-PCT would be expected to diagnose 55.6% of COPD patients by 2017 compared with only 27.3% without the LES, and only 33.3% would be diagnosed in the neighbouring PCT. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that, with appropriate incentives, it is possible to achieve a sustained improvement in COPD case-finding in primary care and that such policies need to be implemented systematically.
    Primary care respiratory journal: journal of the General Practice Airways Group 01/2013; 22(1). DOI:10.4104/pcrj.2013.00008