Differential diagnosis in a primary care population with presumed airway obstruction: a real-life study.

BACKGROUND: Asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) have major symptoms in common. However, the mode of the underlying chronic airway inflammation is different. There is still no single diagnostic test that can be considered a gold standard to distinguish asthma from COPD. OBJECTIVES: To determine the diagnostic accuracy for asthma and COPD of a series of diagnostic steps in a population older than 40 years with probable obstructive airway disease (OAD) in primary care. METHODS: In this prospective cohort study, patients without a certain diagnosis underwent a work-up, including office spirometry by their general practitioner (GP). They were then referred to a pulmonologist, and they had control visits with their GP. The diagnostic gain of subsequent steps was calculated for 2 endpoints, namely the specialist's opinion and the GP's final opinion. RESULTS: Up to 60% of the patients failed to consult with the pulmonologist. For this subgroup, the office spirometry induced significantly more diagnostic congruency than any other diagnostic step. The specialists rejected 44.5% of the diagnoses made by the GPs, including spirometry. High values of diagnostic gain were found after the office spirometry and after the specialist's advice. Up to 25% of the population taking bronchodilators were judged not to suffer from OAD. CONCLUSIONS: Office spirometry added significantly more to the diagnostic certainty of the GPs than questionnaires, history and clinical examination. A pulmonologist's advice contributed more to diagnostic certainty than any other diagnostic step. Nevertheless, 26% of the diagnoses made by the chest physicians were reconsidered by the GPs.

The International Primary Care Respiratory Group (IPCRG) Research Needs Statement 2010.

AIM: Respiratory diseases are a public health issue throughout the world, with high prevalence and morbidity. This Research Needs Statement from the International Primary Care Respiratory Group (IPCRG) aims to highlight unanswered questions on the management of respiratory diseases that are of importance to practising primary care clinicians. METHODS: An informal but inclusive consultation process was instigated in 2009. Draft statements in asthma, rhinitis, COPD, tobacco dependence, and respiratory infections were circulated widely to IPCRG members, other recognised experts, and representatives from a range of economic and healthcare backgrounds. An iterative process was used to generate, prioritise and refine research questions in each section. RESULTS: Two overarching themes emerged. Firstly, there is a real need for research to be undertaken within primary care, which recruits patients representative of primary care populations, evaluates interventions realistically delivered within primary care, and draws conclusions that will be meaningful to professionals working within primary care. Secondly, international and national guidelines exist, but there is little evidence on the best strategies for implementing recommendations. Disease-specific research questions focus on effective and cost-effective ways to prevent disease, confirm the diagnosis, assess control, manage treatment, and empower selfmanagement. Practical questions about how to deliver this comprehensive agenda in diverse primary care settings are highlighted. CONCLUSIONS: We hope that this Research Needs Statement will be used by clinicians and patients campaigning for answers to relevant questions, by researchers seeking funding to provide answers to these questions, and by funding bodies to enable them to prioritise research agendas.

Diagnostic certainty, co-morbidity and medication in a primary care population with presumed airway obstruction: the DIDASCO2 study.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: To document the rate of diagnostic certainty, co-morbidity and use of medication in patients with presumed obstructive airway disease (OAD) in a primary care setting. METHODS: Twenty-six general practitioners (GPs) were asked to select the last 50 contacts with patients older than 40 years of age who were taking bronchodilators and/or inhaled corticosteroids or who had known OAD. After reviewing their medical data on file, the GPs gave their diagnostic opinion and rated their certainty about the diagnosis using a Likert-type scale. RESULTS: Analysis of 1126 files revealed that in at least 523 patients (46.4%), a diagnostic work-up was judged necessary. The GPs judged that 6% of the patients had no OAD. Less than 33% of the study population underwent spirometry during the two years preceding the survey. The number of co-morbid conditions was on average 2.2 for patients with asthma and 3.2 for patients with COPD. Patients with presumed COPD took significantly more drugs (mean, 5.1; 95% CI, 4.8-5.3) than did patients with other diagnostic labels (mean, 4.6 95%; CI, 4.4-4.8). CONCLUSIONS: We confirmed the underuse of spirometry as a diagnostic tool in presumed airway obstruction in primary care. Nearly half of the patients older than 40 years who were taking bronchodilators and/or inhaled corticosteroids needed a diagnostic work-up. This population had a high prevalence of co-morbidity and polypharmacy.

Prevention and management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in primary care: position paper of the European Forum for Primary Care.

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a smoking-related, progressive lung disease that represents a substantial individual, societal and economic burden. Primary care professionals have an important role in healthcare provision for patients with COPD. In this position paper we summarise the current knowledge about, and management of patients with COPD. Next, we describe the role general practitioners and other primary care disciplines (should) have to prevent, diagnose and treat COPD. Finally, we explore differences in the way particular aspects of primary care COPD disease management are available or organised in a number of European countries, in order to identify barriers and provide examples of 'best practices' for optimal primary care management of patients with COPD.

Technical and functional assessment of 10 office spirometers: A multicenter comparative study.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: To investigate the technical properties and user friendliness of 10 office spirometers devoted for use in general practice, and to compare the results with standard diagnostic spirometers. DESIGN: Multicenter study. SETTING: Ten spirometer models were tested independently in three pulmonary function laboratories and by three general practitioners (GPs). MEASUREMENTS: The laboratories studied the technical quality of the office spirometers in terms of precision and agreement with standard spirometers, whereas the three GPs assessed their user friendliness. The spirometers tested were as follows: Spirobank (Medical International Research; Rome, Italy); Simplicity (Puritan Bennett; Pleasanton, CA); OneFlow (Clement Clarke International; Harlow, Essex, UK); Datospir 70 (Sibelmed; Barcelona, Spain); Datospir 120 (Sibelmed); SpiroPro (SensorMedics; Yorba Linda, CA); EasyOne (NDD; Zurich, Switzerland); MicroLoop (Micro Medical; Chatham, Kent, UK); SpiroStar (Medikro; Kuopio, Finland); and Pneumotrac (Vitalograph; Maids Moreton, Buckingham, UK). FVC and FEV1 were measured in 399 subjects. User friendliness was assessed by the three GPs using a questionnaire. RESULTS: The precision of FEV1 of the office and standard spirometers was comparable, but three office spirometers had > 200 mL limits of precision for FVC. Some devices presented a proportional difference on the FEV1 with standard spirometers, underestimating the small values. The limits of agreements between standard and some office spirometers for FEV1/FVC ratio was > 10%. The overall user friendliness was estimated as good. CONCLUSIONS: The global quality and user friendliness of several office spirometers make them acceptable for the detection of COPD, although differences between the laboratory and some of the office spirometers values suggest that the misclassification rates may be increased when using some models of office spirometers.

Spirometry and smoking cessation advice in general practice: a randomised clinical trial.

RATIONALE: To assess the success rate of smoking cessation with the "minimal intervention strategy" in general practice, and to determine the influence of spirometry on this success rate. METHODS: Training in smoking cessation advice was given to 16 general practitioners (GPs). During 12 weeks, these GPs screened their practice population for smoking habits, the degree of dependence on nicotine, and the motivation to quit smoking. Patients willing to stop were randomised to a group that underwent a single office spirometry, or to a control group. The GPs were asked to support the attempts with the minimal intervention strategy. Success rates were compared after 6, 12 and 24 months. RESULTS: On a population of 5590 patients, 1206 smokers were identified (22%). To the vulnerable group, identified following the Prochaska and Di Clemente scheme, the proposal was made to change smoking behaviour. Two hundred and twenty-one patients undertook an attempt of smoking cessation. Nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) or bupropion was prescribed in 51% of the attempts. Sixty-four sustained quitters were counted after 6 months (29%), 43 after 1 year (19%) and 33 after 2 years (15%). We found a small but statistically non-significant difference in success rate in favour of the group that underwent office spirometry. CONCLUSION: GPs can motivate almost 20% of their smoking population to quit smoking. The success rate with the minimal intervention strategy was 19% after 1 year and 15% after 2 years. We found no arguments in favour of confronting smokers with their lung function as a tool for enhancing smoking cessation.

Office spirometry significantly improves early detection of COPD in general practice: the DIDASCO Study.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: To determine if spirometry is essential for the early detection of COPD in general practice, compared to the screening value of a short questionnaire. METHODS: A prospective survey of the population aged 35 to 70 years visiting their general practitioner (GP) during a 12-week period, using a questionnaire on symptoms of obstructive lung disease (OLD). Spirometry was performed in all participants with positive answers and in a 10% random sample from the group without complaints. Twenty GPs were provided with a hand-held spirometer, and received training in performance and interpretation of lung function tests. All 35- to 70-year-old patients (n = 3,408) were screened for current use of bronchodilators. The subgroup receiving bronchodilators (n = 250, 7%) was assumed to have OLD, and was excluded. Airflow obstruction was defined according to the European Respiratory Society standards. RESULTS: The positive predictive power of the questionnaire was low (sensitivity, 58%; specificity, 78%; likelihood ratio, 2.6). One hundred twenty-six cases of formerly unknown OLD were detected in the group of patients with complaints, vs an extrapolated number of 90 in the group without complaints. Despite a negative predictive value of 95% for the questionnaire used, 42% of the newly diagnosed cases of OLD would not have been detected without spirometry. CONCLUSIONS: The use of a spirometer is mandatory if early stages of OLD are to be detected in general practice. Screening for airflow obstruction almost doubles the number of known patients with OLD.

Continuous versus on-demand pharmacotherapy of allergic rhinitis: evidence and practice.

This review aims to compare continuous with on-demand pharmacotherapy of allergic rhinitis by focusing on pharmacodynamic, pharmacokinetic, safety, effectiveness, cost and cost-effectiveness considerations. A working party of experts reviewed and discussed the literature and guidelines, and conducted a qualitative analysis of the Summary of Product Characteristics of specific medicines. With respect to medicines, the working party limited itself to antihistamines, nasal corticosteroids and leukotriene antagonists. Based on a review of the evidence from a multidisciplinary perspective, this article makes pharmacotherapeutic recommendations that are easy, functional and applicable to daily practice in primary care. The pharmacotherapeutic evidence for continuous versus on-demand treatment of allergic rhinitis was limited. Clearly, for corticosteroids, their mechanism of action in allergic rhinitis of reducing allergic inflammation requires continuous therapy at least for the duration of symptoms. For H(1)-antihistamines, some trials suggest that continuous treatment is preferable but more studies are needed to confirm this conclusion. For both H(1)-antihistamines and nasal corticosteroids safety data indicate that continuous treatment may be given without fears of adverse consequences, although a distinction can be made between the first and the second generation antihistamines. With regard to the cost and cost-effectiveness implications of continuous therapy versus on-demand therapy, more studies are necessary before definitive conclusions may be made.

IPCRG Consensus statement: tackling the smoking epidemic - practical guidance for primary care.

Tobacco use will become the world's foremost cause of premature death and disability within 20 years unless current trends are reversed. Many opportunities to reduce this epidemic are missed in primary care. This Discussion paper from the International Primary Care Respiratory Group (IPCRG) - which reflects the IPCRG's understanding of primary care practitioners' needs - summarises a new approach based on strong evidence for effective interventions. All primary care health professionals can increase smoking cessation rates among their patients, even when time and resources are limited. Medical and non-medical staff can support patients who choose to quit by providing information, referral to telephone counselling services, and behavioural counselling using motivational interviewing techniques, where resources permit. Drug therapy to manage nicotine dependence can significantly improve patients' chances of quitting successfully, and is recommended for people who smoke 10 or more cigarettes per day. All interventions should be tailored to the individual's circumstances and attitudes.