No abstract

Background Most patients presenting with acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) in primary care are prescribed antibiotics, but these may not be beneficial, and they can cause side effects and increase the risk of subsequent resistant infections. Point-of-care tests (POCTs) could safely reduce inappropriate antibiotic prescribing and antimicrobial resistance. Objective To determine whether or not the use of a C-reactive protein (CRP) POCT to guide prescribing decisions for AECOPD reduces antibiotic consumption without having a negative impact on chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) health status and is cost-effective. Design A multicentre, parallel-arm, randomised controlled open trial with an embedded process, and a health economic evaluation. Setting General practices in Wales and England. A UK NHS perspective was used for the economic analysis. Participants Adults (aged ≥ 40 years) with a primary care diagnosis of COPD, presenting with an AECOPD (with at least one of increased dyspnoea, increased sputum volume and increased sputum purulence) of between 24 hours’ and 21 days’ duration. Intervention CRP POCTs to guide antibiotic prescribing decisions for AECOPD, compared with usual care (no CRP POCT), using remote online randomisation. Main outcome measures Patient-reported antibiotic consumption for AECOPD within 4 weeks post randomisation and COPD health status as measured with the Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ) at 2 weeks. For the economic evaluation, patient-reported resource use and the EuroQol-5 Dimensions were included. Results In total, 653 participants were randomised from 86 general practices. Three withdrew consent and one was randomised in error, leaving 324 participants in the usual-care arm and 325 participants in the CRP POCT arm. Antibiotics were consumed for AECOPD by 212 out of 274 participants (77.4%) and 150 out of 263 participants (57.0%) in the usual-care and CRP POCT arm, respectively [adjusted odds ratio 0.31, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.20 to 0.47]. The CCQ analysis comprised 282 and 281 participants in the usual-care and CRP POCT arms, respectively, and the adjusted mean CCQ score difference at 2 weeks was 0.19 points (two-sided 90% CI –0.33 to –0.05 points). The upper limit of the CI did not contain the prespecified non-inferiority margin of 0.3. The total cost from a NHS perspective at 4 weeks was £17.59 per patient higher in the CRP POCT arm (95% CI –£34.80 to £69.98; p = 0.408). The mean incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were £222 per 1% reduction in antibiotic consumption compared with usual care at 4 weeks and £15,251 per quality-adjusted life-year gained at 6 months with no significant changes in sensitivity analyses. Patients and clinicians were generally supportive of including CRP POCT in the assessment of AECOPD. Conclusions A CRP POCT diagnostic strategy achieved meaningful reductions in patient-reported antibiotic consumption without impairing COPD health status or increasing costs. There were no associated harms and both patients and clinicians valued the diagnostic strategy. Future work Implementation studies that also build on our qualitative findings could help determine the effect of this intervention over the longer term. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN24346473. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 15. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Acute chest radiographs were obtained from 319 adult patients with acute respiratory infections. Where a lower respiratory infec tion was diagnosed, follow-up chest radiographs were obtained in most patients. A radiologie panel diagnosed pneumonia in 21 pa tients. The agreements between the panel and 3 independent inter preters, 2 residents in radiology, and one senior chest physician, were assessed. Also the reports given by the specialist in radiology at the Department of Radiology were compared with the panel's evaluation. While the kappa-agreements between the panel's inter pretations and those by the Department of Radiology and the consultant in chest medicine was 0.71 and 0.72, respectively, the corresponding kappa-values between the residents and the panel was only 0.50. The proportion of agreement when pneumonia was diagnosed was 0.56 between the panel and the Department of Radi ology, and 0.59 between the panel and the chest consultant, com pared to 0.36 between the panel and the residents. The study demon strates the difficulty of diagnosing outpatient pneumonia and the importance of experience.

Background Wheezes and crackles are well-known signs of lung diseases, but can also be heard in apparently healthy adults. However, their prevalence in a general population has been sparsely described. The objective of this study was to determine the prevalence of wheezes and crackles in a large general adult population and explore associations with self-reported disease, smoking status and lung function. Methods We recorded lung sounds in 4033 individuals 40 years or older and collected information on self-reported disease. Pulse oximetry and spirometry were carried out. We estimated age-standardized prevalence of wheezes and crackles and associations between wheezes and crackles and variables of interest were analyzed with univariable and multivariable logistic regressions. Results Twenty-eight percent of individuals had wheezes or crackles. The age-standardized prevalence of wheezes was 18.6% in women and 15.3% in men, and of crackles, 10.8 and 9.4%, respectively. Wheezes were mostly found during expiration and crackles during inspiration. Significant predictors of expiratory wheezes in multivariable analyses were age (10 years increase - OR 1.18, 95%CI 1.09–1.30), female gender (1.45, 1.2–1.8), self-reported asthma (1.36, 1.00–1.83), and current smoking (1.70, 1.28–2.23). The most important predictors of inspiratory crackles were age (1.76, 1.57–1.99), current smoking, (1.94, 1.40–2.69), mMRC ≥2 (1.79, 1.18–2.65), SpO2 (0.88, 0.81–0.96), and FEV1 Z-score (0.86, 0.77–0.95). Conclusions Nearly over a quarter of adults present adventitious lung sounds on auscultation. Age was the most important predictor of adventitious sounds, particularly crackles. The adventitious sounds were also associated with self-reported disease, current smoking and measures of lung function. The presence of findings in two or more auscultation sites was associated with a higher risk of decreased lung function than solitary findings.

Aims Heart failure (HF) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are main causes of dyspnoea, and echocardiography and spirometry are essential investigations for these diagnoses. Our aim was to determine the prevalence of HF and COPD in a general population, also how the diseases may be identified, and to what extent their clinical characteristics differ. Methods and results In the seventh survey of Tromsø study (2015-16), subjects aged 40 years or more were examined with echocardiography, spirometry, lung sound recordings, questionnaires, including the modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) questionnaire on dyspnoea, and N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide analysis. A diagnosis of HF (HF with reduced ejection fraction, HF with mid-range ejection fraction, or HF with preserved ejection fraction) or COPD was established according to current guidelines. Predictors of HF and COPD were evaluated by logistic regression and receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. A total of 7110 participants could be evaluated for COPD, 1624 for HF, and 1538 for both diseases. Age-standardized prevalence of HF was 6.8% for women and 6.1% for men; the respective figures for COPD were 5.2% and 5.1%. Among the 1538 evaluated for both diseases, 139 subjects fulfilled the HF criteria, but only 17.1% reported to have the disease. Of those fulfilling the COPD criteria, 31.6% reported to have the disease. Shortness of breath at exertion was a frequent finding in HF; 59% of those with mMRC ≥2 had HF, while such shortness of breath was found in 24% among those with COPD. Reporting mMRC ≥2 had an odds ratio for HF of 19.5 (95% confidence interval 11.3-33.7), whereas the odds ratio for COPD was 6.3 (95% confidence interval 3.5-11.6). Current smoking was the strongest predictor of COPD but did not predict HF. Basal inspiratory crackles were significant predictors of HF in multivariable analysis. Among the subtypes of HF, an age <70 years was most frequently found in HF with reduced ejection fraction, in 51.7%. Clinical scores based on the predictive value in multivariable analysis of history, symptoms, and signs predicted HF and COPD with areas under the curve of 0.833 and 0.829, respectively. Conclusions Study participants with HF and COPD were in most cases not aware of their condition. In general practice, when an elderly patient present with shortness of breath, both diseases should be considered. Previous cardiovascular disease points at HF, while a history of smoking points at COPD. The threshold should be low for ordering echocardiography or spirometry for verifying the suspected cause of dyspnoea.