The aim of the present study was to establish the agreement between two recommended definitions of airflow obstruction in symptomatic adults referred for spirometry by their general practitioner, and investigate how rates of airflow obstruction change when prebronchodilator instead of post-bronchodilator spirometry is performed.The diagnostic spirometric results of 14,056 adults with respiratory obstruction were analysed. Differences in interpretation between a fixed 0.70 forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1)/ forced vital capacity (FVC) cut-off point and a sex-and age-specific lower limit of normal cut-off point for this ratio were investigated.Of the subjects, 53% were female and 69% were current or ex-smokers. The mean postbronchodilator FEV1/FVC was 0.73 in males and 0.78 in females. The sensitivity of the fixed relative to the lower limit of normal cut-off point definition was 97.9%, with a specificity of 91.2%, positive predictive value of 72.0% and negative predictive value of 99.5%. For the subgroup of current or ex-smokers aged o50 yrs, these values were 100, 82.0, 69.2 and 100%, respectively. The proportion of false positive diagnoses using the fixed cut-off point increased with age. The positive predictive value of pre-bronchodilator airflow obstruction was 74.7% among current or ex-smokers aged o50 yrs.The current clinical guideline-recommended fixed 0.70 forced expiratory volume in one second/ forced vital capacity cut-off point leads to substantial overdiagnosis of obstruction in middle-aged and elderly patients in primary care. Using pre-bronchodilator spirometry leads to a high rate of false positive interpretations of obstruction in primary care.KEYWORDS: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diagnostics, lung function measurements, primary care C hronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a respiratory condition that is predominantly caused by smoking, and is characterised by airflow obstruction that is progressive in nature and not fully reversible [1]. Recent estimates for the population prevalence of COPD in adults aged .40 yrs range 11-26% for countries throughout the world [2]. As the majority of patients with COPD are diagnosed and managed in primary care, timely diagnosis and subsequent staging both require primary care spirometry in order to confirm the presence and severity of airflow obstruction [3].Airflow obstruction in COPD is present when a patient shows a disproportionate reduction in the maximal airflow from the lungs in relation to the maximal volume that can be displaced from the lungs [4]. According to current COPD guideline recommendations for primary [5,6] and secondary care [1,7,8], this is determined by measuring the forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1)/forced vital capacity (FVC) ratio. Without exception, the guidelines recommend a fixed 0.70 cut-off point for FEV1/FVC in deciding whether or not airflow obstruction is present, regardless of the sex and age of the subject involved. However, it is well documented that ageing is associated wi...

In this randomized controlled economic evaluation we compared guided asthma self-management with usual asthma care according to guidelines for Dutch family physicians. Nineteen family practices were randomized, and 193 adults with stable asthma (98 self-management, 95 usual care) were included and monitored for 2 years. We hypothesized that introducing self-management would not compromise asthma control and cost would be equal to or lower than in usual care. Patient-specific cost data were collected, preference-based utilities were assessed, and incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) and successfully treated week gained was calculated. Self-management patients gained 0.039 QALY (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.003 to 0.075) and experienced 81 (95% CI, 78 to 84) successfully treated weeks in 2 years' time; the corresponding figures for usual care were 0.024 (95% CI, -0.022 to 0.071) and 75 (95% CI, 72 to 78). Total costs were 1,084 euros(95% CI, 938 to 1,228) for self-management and 1,097 euros (95% CI, 933 to 1,260) for usual care. Self-management patients consumed 1,680 (95% CI, 1,538 to 1,822) puffs of budesonide, usual care patients 1,897 (95% CI, 1,679 to 2,115). Mean productivity cost due to limited activity days was 213 euros lower among self-management patients. When all costs were included, self-management was cost-effective on all outcomes. The probability that self-management was cost-effective relative to usual care in terms of QALYs was 52%. We conclude that guided self-management is a safe and efficient alternative approach compared with asthma treatment usually provided in Dutch primary care.

Background: A study was undertaken to determine the effectiveness of asthma self-management in general practice. Methods: Nineteen general practices were randomly allocated to usual care (UC) or self-management (SM). Asthma patients were included after confirmation of the GP diagnosis. Follow up was 2 years. Patients kept diary cards and visited the lung function laboratory every 6 months. Outcomes were number of successfully treated weeks, limited activity days, asthma specific quality of life, forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV 1 ), FEV 1 reversibility, concentration of histamine provoking a fall in FEV 1 of 20% or more (PC 20 histamine), and amount of inhaled steroids. Results: A total of 214 patients were included in the study (104 UC/110 SM; one third of the total asthma population in general practice); 62% were female. The mean percentage of successfully treated weeks per patient in the UC group was 72% (74/103 weeks) compared with 78% (81/105 weeks) in the SM group (p=0.003). The mean number of limited activity days was 1.2 (95% CI 0.5 to 1.9) in the SM group and 3.9 (95% CI 2.5 to 5.4) in the UC group. The estimated increase in asthma quality of life score was 0.10 points per visit in the UC group and 0.21 points per visit in the SM group (p=0.055). FEV 1 , FEV 1 reversibility, and PC 20 histamine did not change. There was a saving of 217 puffs of inhaled steroid per patient in favour of the SM group (p<0.05). Conclusion: Self-management lowers the burden of illness as perceived by patients with asthma and is at least as effective as the treatment usually provided in Dutch primary care. Self-management is a safe basis for intermittent treatment with inhaled corticosteroids.

No abstract

The aim of this study was to evaluate which factors are associated with asthma control experienced by asthma patients. In a cross-sectional study patients aged 16-60 years with mild to moderate asthma were selected. The influence of the following factors on asthma control was studied in a multivariate model: age, gender, socioeconomic status, smoking, perceived hyperresponsiveness (PHR, responding with asthma symptoms to one or more triggers), allergy (Phadiatop), long-acting bronchodilating agents, and inhaled corticosteroids. Asthma control was measured by means of the Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) as developed by Juniper. Forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) was measured by means of a portable spirometer. In this study with 311 patients, mean ACQ score was 1.39 (range 0-4.43). A stepwise backward linear regression analysis showed that low socioeconomic status (beta 0.425; p=0.001), current smoking (beta 0.555; p<0.001), high dose of inhaled corticosteroids (beta 0.364; p=0.04) and perceived hyperresponsiveness for increasing number of different triggers (PHR for 1 trigger beta 0.833; p=0.03; 2 triggers beta 0.810; p=0.03; 3 triggers beta 0.995; p=0.01; 4 triggers beta 1.131; p=0.002; 5 triggers beta 1.182; p=0.002) are independent predictors for poorer asthma control. Beside treatment with medication, stopping smoking and avoidance of triggers are factors, which may have a high impact on asthma control.