Acute respiratory illness as a trigger for detecting chronic bronchitis in adults at risk of COPD: a primary care survey

Service de Pneumologie et Réanimation, Hôpital Hôtel-Dieu, Université Paris-Descartes, AP-HP, Paris, France.
Primary care respiratory journal: journal of the General Practice Airways Group (Impact Factor: 2.5). 12/2010; 19(4):371-7. DOI: 10.4104/pcrj.2010.00042
Source: PubMed


To evaluate the impact of chronic bronchitis in patients identified among subjects at risk of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) but currently free from any known chronic respiratory disorder, visiting a general practitioner for an acute respiratory episode.
A multicentre, cross-sectional survey carried out in primary care.
Primary care practitioners (n = 772) examined 14,030 patients with acute cough (male: 56.9%, age 50.6 ± 16.5 years). Of these, 3,615 were at risk of COPD (> 40 years and tobacco use > 10 pack-years) and constituted the study population: 79.8% reported current symptoms of chronic bronchitis. Compared to patients without chronic bronchitis, they were older, more frequently exposed to occupational pollutants or to passive smoking, had more tobacco use (p < 0.001), reported dyspnoea > Grade 2 more frequently, and had poorer quality of life as assessed by the EuroQOL-5D questionnaire.
In this survey, previously unrecognised chronic bronchitis was diagnosed in a high proportion of at-risk patients with acute respiratory episodes. Chronic bronchitis was associated with significantly poorer health status. Acute respiratory illness could be an appropriate opportunity for screening those patients at risk of COPD with lung function testing.

Download full-text


Available from: Jacques Gaillat, Oct 06, 2015
23 Reads
  • Source
    Bronchial Asthma - Emerging Therapeutic Strategies, 02/2012; , ISBN: 978-953-51-0140-6
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality. However, much of the disease burden remains undiagnosed. Aim To compare the yield and cost effectiveness of two COPD case-finding approaches in primary care. Design and setting Pilot randomised controlled trial in two general practices in the West Midlands, UK. Method A total of 1634 ever-smokers aged 35-79 years with no history of COPD or asthma were randomised into either a 'targeted' or 'opportunistic' case-finding arm. Respiratory questionnaires were posted to patients in the 'targeted' arm and provided to patients in the 'opportunistic' arm at routine GP appointments. Those reporting at least one chronic respiratory symptom were invited for spirometry. COPD was defined as pre-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 second/forced vital capacity (FEV1/FVC)<0.7 and FEV1<80% of predicted. Primary outcomes were the difference in the proportion of patients diagnosed with COPD and the cost per case detected. Results Twenty-six per cent (212/815) in the 'targeted' and 13.6% (111/819) in the 'opportunistic' arm responded to the questionnaire and 78.3% (166/212) and 73.0% (81/111), respectively, reported symptoms; 1.2% (10/815) and 0.7% (6/819) of patients in the 'targeted' and 'opportunistic' arms were diagnosed with COPD (difference in proportions = 0.5% [95% confidence interval {CI} = -0.5% to 3.08%]). Over a 12-month period, the 'opportunistic' case-finding yield could be improved to 1.95% (95% CI = 1.0% to 2.9%). The cost-per case detected was £424.56 in the 'targeted' and £242.20 in the 'opportunistic' arm. Conclusion Opportunistic case finding may be more effective and cost effective than targeting patients with a postal questionnaire alone. A larger randomised controlled trial with adequate sample size is required to test this.
    British Journal of General Practice 01/2013; 63(606):55-62. DOI:10.3399/bjgp13X660788 · 2.29 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objective: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality, yet research suggests this disease is greatly underdiagnosed. This literature review sought to summarize the most common and significant variables associated with case-finding or missed cases of COPD to inform more effective and efficient detection of high-risk COPD patients in primary care. Methods: PubMed and EMBASE were searched for articles describing case-finding and epidemiologic research to detect or characterize new cases of COPD. International studies in primary and non-primary care settings, published in English from 2002-2014, were eligible for inclusion. Studies related to risk factors for development of COPD were excluded. Results: Of the 33 studies identified and reviewed, 21 were case-finding or screening and 12 were epidemiological, including cross-sectional, longitudinal, and retrospective designs. A range of variables were identified within and across studies. Variables common to both screening and epidemiological studies included age, smoking status, and respiratory symptoms. Seven significant predictors from epidemiologic studies did not appear in screening tools. No studies targeted discovery of higher risk patients such as those with reduced lung function or risks for exacerbations. Conclusion: Variables used to identify new cases of COPD or differentiate COPD cases and non-cases are wide- ranging, (from sociodemographic to self-reported health or health history variables), providing insight into important factors for case identification. Further research is underway to develop and test the best, smallest variable set that can be used as a screening tool to identify people with undiagnosed, high-risk COPD in primary care.
    01/2014; 2(2). DOI:10.15326/jcopdf.2.2.2014.0152
Show more