Point of care microspirometry to facilitate the COPD diagnostic process in primary care: a clustered randomised trial.

We studied if pre-bronchodilator FEV1/FEV6 determinations with microspirometers by GPs improve the diagnostic process for COPD in a 6-8 month clustered randomised controlled trial in Dutch general practices ( http://www.trialregister.nl : NTR4041). GPs allocated to microspirometry (MI) used COPD-6® microspirometers in patients ≥50 years old with a smoking history and respiratory complaints that could indicate undiagnosed COPD and ask to refer patients for full spirometry if MI was positive (FEV1/FEV6 <0.73). Introduction of the COPD-6® was postponed in the usual care (UC) group. GPs of both study arms were asked to list all patients that fulfilled study criteria and at the end of the study we screened the electronic medical record system for number of patients that fulfilled study criteria and visited their GP within the study period. Main end point was a documented diagnostic conclusion of COPD within 3 months after the patient's visit. We used multilevel logistic regression with correction for relevant covariates. Next, we described the process of care. 21 practices (88 GPs) participated and 416 possible undiagnosed COPD patient visited these practices in the study period. 78 (of 192 visiting) subjects were listed by MI GPs and diagnostic conclusions were documented in 77%, compared to 61 listed (of 224 visiting) subjects and 44% with documented diagnostic conclusions by UC GPs (Odds Ratio: OR: 4.3, 95%CI: 1.6-11.5). Microspirometry improved the diagnostic process for possible underlying COPD in patients who consulted their GP with respiratory symptoms, but the majority of possible undiagnosed COPD patients remained unrecognised by GPs.

Diagnostic accuracy of pre-bronchodilator FEV1/FEV6 from microspirometry to detect airflow obstruction in primary care: a randomised cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Forced expiratory volume in 1s/forced expiratory volume in 6 s ( FEV1/FEV6) assessment with a microspirometer may be useful in the diagnostic work up of subjects who are suspected of having COPD in primary care. AIM: To determine the diagnostic accuracy of a negative pre-bronchodilator (BD) microspirometry test relative to a full diagnostic spirometry test in subjects in whom general practitioners (GPs) suspect airflow obstruction. METHODS: Cross-sectional study in which the order of microspirometry and diagnostic spirometry tests was randomised. Study subjects were (ex-)smokers aged ≥50 years referred for diagnostic spirometry to a primary care diagnostic centre by their GPs. A pre-BD FEV1/FEV6 value <0.73 as measured with the PiKo-6 microspirometer was compared with a post-BD FEV1/FVC (forced vital capacity) <0.70 and FEV1/FVC

An expert-supported monitoring system for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in general practice: results of a cluster randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the long-term effectiveness of a general practice monitoring system with respiratory expert recommendations for general practitioners' management of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), compared with usual care. DESIGN, SETTINGS AND PARTICIPANTS: A multicentre randomised controlled trial of patients with COPD, clustered by general practices; 200 participants were recruited to maintain at least 75 participants per group for analysis. The trial took place from July 2005 to February 2008 in the south-western region of the Netherlands. INTERVENTION: Ongoing half-yearly monitoring of COPD patients with respiratory expert recommendations for the GP was compared with usual care. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome - Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire (CRQ) score; secondary outcomes - CRQ domain scores, generic health-related quality of life (Short-Form 12 and EuroQol-5D), breathlessness (Modified Medical Research Council score), exacerbations, and decline in forced expiratory volume in 1 second. A detailed process evaluation was performed along with the trial. RESULTS: Data from 170 participants were analysed. Based on repeated measurement analyses, the additional gain in CRQ score during follow-up was 0.004 points for monitoring compared with usual care (95% CI, - 0.172 to 0.180). Also, no important differences between monitoring and the usual care group were found for secondary outcomes. Half the monitoring visits resulted in disease management recommendations by a respiratory expert, and 46% of these recommendations were implemented by the GPs. Patient adherence to lifestyle recommendations was low. CONCLUSION: An expert-supported monitoring system for patients with COPD was not clinically effective. As patients had a pre-existing entry in the monitoring system, the population may be well regulated, with reduced room for improvement. TRIAL REGISTRATION: www.clinicaltrials.gov NCT00542061.