An Official American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society Statement: Research questions in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

BACKGROUND: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a leading cause of morbidity, mortality, and resource use worldwide. The goal of this Official American Thoracic Society (ATS)/European Respiratory Society (ERS) Research Statement is to describe evidence related to diagnosis, assessment, and management; identify gaps in knowledge; and make recommendations for future research. It is not intended to provide clinical practice recommendations on COPD diagnosis and management. METHODS: Clinicians, researchers, and patient advocates with expertise in COPD were invited to participate. A literature search of Medline was performed, and studies deemed relevant were selected. The search was not a systematic review of the evidence. Existing evidence was appraised and summarized, and then salient knowledge gaps were identified. RESULTS: Recommendations for research that addresses important gaps in the evidence in all areas of COPD were formulated via discussion and consensus. CONCLUSIONS: Great strides have been made in the diagnosis, assessment, and management of COPD as well as understanding its pathogenesis. Despite this, many important questions remain unanswered. This ATS/ERS Research Statement highlights the types of research that leading clinicians, researchers, and patient advocates believe will have the greatest impact on patient-centered outcomes.

An official American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society statement: research questions in COPD.

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a leading cause of morbidity, mortality, and resource use worldwide. The goal of this official American Thoracic Society (ATS)/European Respiratory Society (ERS) research statement is to describe evidence related to diagnosis, assessment and management; identify gaps in knowledge; and make recommendations for future research. It is not intended to provide clinical practice recommendations on COPD diagnosis and management. Clinicians, researchers, and patient advocates with expertise in COPD were invited to participate. A literature search of Medline was performed, and studies deemed relevant were selected. The search was not a systematic review of the evidence. Existing evidence was appraised and summarised, and then salient knowledge gaps were identified. Recommendations for research that addresses important gaps in the evidence in all areas of COPD were formulated via discussion and consensus. Great strides have been made in the diagnosis, assessment and management of COPD, as well as understanding its pathogenesis. Despite this, many important questions remain unanswered. This ATS/ERS research statement highlights the types of research that leading clinicians, researchers, and patient advocates believe will have the greatest impact on patient-centred outcomes.

Expanding nurse practice in COPD: is it key to providing high quality, effective and safe patient care?

The prevalence of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), a common and preventable chronic disease, is on the increase, and so are the financial and social burdens associated with it. The management of COPD is particularly challenging, as patients have complex health and social needs requiring life-long monitoring and treatment. In order to address these issues and reduce the burden imposed by COPD, the development of innovative disease management models is vital. Nurses are in a key position to assume a leading role in the management of COPD since they frequently represent the first point of contact for patients and are involved in all stages of care. Although evidence is still limited, an increasing number of studies have suggested that nurse-led consultations and interventions for the management of COPD have the potential to impact positively on the health and quality of life of patients. The role of nurses in the management of COPD around the world could be significantly expanded and strengthened. Providing adequate educational opportunities and support to nurses, as well as addressing funding issues and system barriers and recognising the importance of the expanding roles of nurses, is vital to the well-being of patients with long-term medical conditions such as COPD and to society as a whole, in order to reduce the burden of this disease.

COPD uncovered: an international survey on the impact of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease [COPD] on a working age population.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 210 million people are estimated to have chronic obstructive pulmonary disease [COPD] worldwide. The burden of disease is known to be high, though less is known about those of a younger age. The aim of this study was to investigate the wider personal, economic and societal burden of COPD on a cross country working-age cohort. METHODS: A cross-country [Brazil, China, Germany, Turkey, US, UK] cross-sectional survey methodology was utilised to answer the research questions. 2426 participants aged 45-67 recruited via a number of recruitment methods specific to each country completed the full survey. Inclusion criteria were a recalled physician diagnosis of COPD, a smoking history of > 10 pack years and the use of COPD medications in the previous 3 months prior to questioning. The survey included items from the validated Work Productivity and Activity Impairment [WPAI] scale and the EuroQoL 5 Dimension [EQ-5D] scale. Disease severity was measured using the 5-point MRC [Medical Research Council] dyspnoea scale as a surrogate measure. RESULTS: 64% had either moderate [n = 1012] or severe [n = 521] COPD, although this varied by country. 75% of the cohort reported at least one comorbid condition. Quality of life declined with severity of illness [mild, mean EQ-5D score = 0.84; moderate 0.58; severe 0.41]. The annual cost of healthcare utilisation [excluding treatment costs and diagnostic tests] per individual was estimated to be $2,364 [£1,500]. For those remaining in active employment [n: 677]: lost time from work cost the individual an average of $880 [£556] per annum and lifetime losses of $7,365 [£4,661] amounting to $596,000 [£377,000] for the cohort. 447 [~40%] of the working population had retired prematurely because of COPD incurring individual estimated lifetime income losses of $316,000 [£200,000] or a combined total of $141 m [£89.6 m]. As the mean age of retirees was 58.3 and average time since retirement was 4 years, this suggests the average age of retirement is around 54. This would mean a high societal and economic impact in all study countries, particularly where typical state retirement ages are higher, for example in Brazil, Germany and the UK [65] and the US [65,66,67], compared to Turkey [58 for women, 60 for men] and China [60]. CONCLUSIONS: Although generalisation across a broader COPD population is limited due to the varied participant recruitment methods, these data nevertheless suggest that COPD has significant personal, economic and societal burden on working age people. Further efforts to improve COPD diagnosis and management are required.

Improving primary care management of asthma: do we know what really works?

Asthma imposes a substantial burden on individuals and societies. Patients with asthma need high-quality primary care management; however, evidence suggests the quality of this care can be highly variable. Here we identify and report factors contributing to high-quality management. Twelve primary care global asthma experts, representing nine countries, identified key factors. A literature review (past 10 years) was performed to validate or refute the expert viewpoint. Key driving factors identified were: policy, clinical guidelines, rewards for performance, practice organisation and workforce. Further analysis established the relevant factor components. Review evidence supported the validity of each driver; however, impact on patient outcomes was uncertain. Single interventions (e.g. healthcare practitioner education) showed little effect; interventions driven by national policy (e.g. incentive schemes and teamworking) were more effective. The panel's opinion, supported by literature review, concluded that multiple primary care interventions offer greater benefit than any single intervention in asthma management.

A Patient-Centered Description of Severe Asthma: Patient Understanding Leading to Assessment for a Severe Asthma Referral (PULSAR)

BACKGROUND: Although severe asthma can be life-threatening, many patients are unaware they have this condition. OBJECTIVES: Patient Understanding Leading to Assessment for a Severe Asthma Referral (PULSAR) is a novel, multidisciplinary working group aiming to develop and disseminate a global, patient-centered description of severe asthma to improve patient understanding of severe asthma and effect a change in patient behavior whereby patients are encouraged to visit their healthcare professional, when appropriate. METHODS: Current definitions from patient organization websites, asthma guidelines, and medication information for key asthma drugs were assessed and informed a multidisciplinary working group, convened to identify common concepts and terminology used to define severe asthma. A patient-centered description of severe asthma and patient checklist were drafted based on working-group discussions and reviewed by an external behavioral scientist for patient understanding and relevance. These were tested using an online US/Canadian survey. RESULTS: The patient-centered description of severe asthma and patient checklist were reviewed and re-drafted by the authors. The text was simplified following the behavioral-scientist review. The survey (n = 153) included 105 patients with severe asthma. Of those with severe asthma, 92.2% of patients reported that the description was consistent with their experiences of severe asthma and 92.6% of patients reported that the PULSAR initiative would encourage them to visit their healthcare provider. CONCLUSION: A patient-centered description of severe asthma has been developed and tested using patients with severe asthma; this description will allow patients to assess whether they might have severe asthma and prompt them to visit their healthcare provider, if appropriate.

Severe asthma is a serious form of asthma. It can be harmful to your health and affect the way you live your life. Some patients do not know that they have severe asthma or visit their doctor and ask for help. A new group, called Patient Understanding Leading to Assessment for a Severe Asthma Referral (PULSAR), would like to help patients understand their asthma symptoms. They have developed a description of severe asthma and a checklist. These may help patients decide if their symptoms require a visit to the doctor.The PULSAR description and checklist were developed in four parts. Part 1 looked at if patients and doctors/nurses defined severe asthma in the same way. Results showed that patients defined severe asthma using symptoms and doctors defined severe asthma using treatments. In Part 2, patients, patient advocacy group members, nurses, doctors, specialists, and a scientist talked about the ways severe asthma were described in Part 1. The group agreed on a set of words to describe severe asthma. These words were then used in the PULSAR description and checklist. In Part 3, a behavioral scientist reviewed the PULSAR description and checklist. They said that simple language would make it easy to understand. In Part 4, patients with severe asthma were asked what they thought about the description and checklist using an online survey. The survey showed that almost all patients understood the description and checklist. Many patients said that the description and checklist encouraged them to see a doctor.A new description of severe asthma and checklist have been developed by PULSAR. Testing shows that they should encourage patients to visit their doctor when needed. This may help patients understand their symptoms and help doctors make the correct diagnosis. This should help patients get the support and treatment they need.

The use of multiple respiratory inhalers requiring different inhalation techniques has an adverse effect on COPD outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Patients with COPD may be prescribed multiple inhalers as part of their treatment regimen, which require different inhalation techniques. Previous literature has shown that the effectiveness of inhaled treatment can be adversely affected by incorrect inhaler technique. Prescribing a range of device types could worsen this problem, leading to poorer outcomes in COPD patients, but the impact is not yet known. AIMS: To compare clinical outcomes of COPD patients who use devices requiring similar inhalation technique with those who use devices with mixed techniques. METHODS: A matched cohort design was used, with 2 years of data from the Optimum Patient Care Research Database. Matching variables were established from a baseline year of follow-up data, and two cohorts were formed: a "similar-devices cohort" and a "mixed-devices cohort". COPD-related events were recorded during an outcome year of follow-up. The primary outcome measure was an incidence rate ratio (IRR) comparing the rate of exacerbations between study cohorts. A secondary outcome compared average daily use of short-acting beta agonist (SABA). RESULTS: The final study sample contained 8,225 patients in each cohort (mean age 67 [SD, 10], 57% males, 37% current smokers). Patients in the similar-devices cohort had a lower rate of exacerbations compared with those in the mixed-devices cohort (adjusted IRR 0.82, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.80-0.84) and were less likely to be in a higher-dose SABA group (adjusted proportional odds ratio 0.54, 95% CI 0.51-0.57). CONCLUSION: COPD patients who were prescribed one or more additional inhaler devices requiring similar inhalation techniques to their previous device(s) showed better outcomes than those who were prescribed devices requiring different techniques.

An official American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society statement: research questions in COPD.

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a leading cause of morbidity, mortality and resource use worldwide. The goal of this official American Thoracic Society (ATS)/European Respiratory Society (ERS) Research Statement is to describe evidence related to diagnosis, assessment, and management; identify gaps in knowledge; and make recommendations for future research. It is not intended to provide clinical practice recommendations on COPD diagnosis and management. Clinicians, researchers and patient advocates with expertise in COPD were invited to participate. A literature search of Medline was performed, and studies deemed relevant were selected. The search was not a systematic review of the evidence. Existing evidence was appraised and summarised, and then salient knowledge gaps were identified. Recommendations for research that addresses important gaps in the evidence in all areas of COPD were formulated via discussion and consensus. Great strides have been made in the diagnosis, assessment and management of COPD, as well as understanding its pathogenesis. Despite this, many important questions remain unanswered. This ATS/ERS research statement highlights the types of research that leading clinicians, researchers and patient advocates believe will have the greatest impact on patient-centred outcomes.