RESUMO
Rationale: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a prevalent and burdensome condition in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Challenges to better care include more effective diagnosis and access to affordable interventions. There are no previous reports describing therapeutic needs of populations with COPD in LMICs who were identified through screening. Objectives: To describe unmet therapeutic need in screening-detected COPD in LMIC settings. Methods: We compared interventions recommended by the international Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease COPD strategy document, with that received in 1,000 people with COPD identified by population screening at three LMIC sites in Nepal, Peru, and Uganda. We calculated costs using data on the availability and affordability of medicines. Measurement and Main Results: The greatest unmet need for nonpharmacological interventions was for education and vaccinations (applicable to all), pulmonary rehabilitation (49%), smoking cessation (30%), and advice on biomass smoke exposure (26%). Ninety-five percent of the cases were previously undiagnosed, and few were receiving therapy (4.5% had short-acting ß-agonists). Only three of 47 people (6%) with a previous COPD diagnosis had access to drugs consistent with recommendations. None of those with more severe COPD were accessing appropriate maintenance inhalers. Even when available, maintenance treatments were unaffordable, with 30 days of treatment costing more than a low-skilled worker's daily average wage. Conclusions: We found a significant missed opportunity to reduce the burden of COPD in LMIC settings, with most cases undiagnosed. Although there is unmet need in developing novel therapies, in LMICs where the burden is greatest, better diagnosis combined with access to affordable interventions could translate to immediate benefit.
Assuntos
Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica , Abandono do Hábito de Fumar , Humanos , Países em Desenvolvimento , Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica/diagnóstico , Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica/epidemiologia , Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica/terapia , Uganda , PeruRESUMO
Background: American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society guidelines recommend context-specific exposure assessments to diagnose interstitial lung disease (ILD). In sub-Saharan Africa, ILD diagnoses are rare, and locally validated ILD exposure questionnaires are not used. Methods: A physician-administered ILD exposure questionnaire was developed using a four-step mixed-methods modified Delphi approach. First, ILD questionnaires from high-income countries and data from Pneumotox were reviewed, compiled and face-validated. Second, a local pilot group of ILD experts ranked item relevance using a Likert scale and suggested additions. Third, the questionnaire format and pilot rankings were addressed in a focus group discussion that was analysed using grounded theory. Finally, following focus group discussion modifications, the resulting items (with three duplicate item groups for evaluation of internal consistency) were ranked for importance by members of the Pan-African Thoracic Society (PATS). Results: Face validation resulted in 82 items in four categories: "Smoking and Drugs", "Environmental Exposures", "Occupations" and "Medications". Pilot group (n=10) ranking revealed 27 outliers and 30 novel suggestions. Focus group (n=12) discussion resulted in 10 item deletions, 14 additions and 22 re-wordings; themes included desire for extensive questionnaires and stigma sensitivity. Final validation involved 58 PATS members (mean±sd age 46±10.6 â years, 76% male, from 17 countries) ranking 84 items derived from previous steps and three duplicate question groups. The questionnaire was internally consistent (Cronbach's α >0.80) and ultimately included 73 items. Conclusion: This mixed-methods study included experts from 17 countries in sub-Saharan Africa and successfully developed a 73-item ILD exposure questionnaire for sub-Saharan Africa. African pulmonary experts valued region-specific additions and ranked several items from existing ILD questionnaires as unimportant.
Assuntos
Países em Desenvolvimento , Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica , Análise Custo-Benefício , Humanos , Renda , Programas de Rastreamento , Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica/diagnóstico , Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica/epidemiologia , Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica/prevenção & controleRESUMO
Importance: Most of the global morbidity and mortality in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) occurs in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), with significant economic effects. Objective: To assess the discriminative accuracy of 3 instruments using questionnaires and peak expiratory flow (PEF) to screen for COPD in 3 LMIC settings. Design, Setting, and Participants: A cross-sectional analysis of discriminative accuracy, conducted between January 2018 and March 2020 in semiurban Bhaktapur, Nepal; urban Lima, Peru; and rural Nakaseke, Uganda, using a random age- and sex-stratified sample of the population 40 years or older. Exposures: Three screening tools, the COPD Assessment in Primary Care to Identify Undiagnosed Respiratory Disease and Exacerbation Risk (CAPTURE; range, 0-6; high risk indicated by a score of 5 or more or score 2-5 with low PEF [<250 L/min for females and <350 L/min for males]), the COPD in LMICs Assessment questionnaire (COLA-6; range, 0-5; high risk indicated by a score of 4 or more), and the Lung Function Questionnaire (LFQ; range, 0-25; high risk indicated by a score of 18 or less) were assessed against a reference standard diagnosis of COPD using quality-assured postbronchodilator spirometry. CAPTURE and COLA-6 include a measure of PEF. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was discriminative accuracy of the tools in identifying COPD as measured by area under receiver operating characteristic curves (AUCs) with 95% CIs. Secondary outcomes included sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value. Results: Among 10â¯709 adults who consented to participate in the study (mean age, 56.3 years (SD, 11.7); 50% female), 35% had ever smoked, and 30% were currently exposed to biomass smoke. The unweighted prevalence of COPD at the 3 sites was 18.2% (642/3534 participants) in Nepal, 2.7% (97/3550) in Peru, and 7.4% (264/3580) in Uganda. Among 1000 COPD cases, 49.3% had clinically important disease (Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease classification B-D), 16.4% had severe or very severe airflow obstruction (forced expiratory volume in 1 second <50% predicted), and 95.3% of cases were previously undiagnosed. The AUC for the screening instruments ranged from 0.717 (95% CI, 0.677-0.774) for LFQ in Peru to 0.791 (95% CI, 0.770-0.809) for COLA-6 in Nepal. The sensitivity ranged from 34.8% (95% CI, 25.3%-45.2%) for COLA-6 in Nepal to 64.2% (95% CI, 60.3%-67.9%) for CAPTURE in Nepal. The mean time to administer the instruments was 7.6 minutes (SD 1.11), and data completeness was 99.5%. Conclusions and Relevance: This study demonstrated that screening instruments for COPD were feasible to administer in 3 low- and middle-income settings. Further research is needed to assess instrument performance in other low- and middle-income settings and to determine whether implementation is associated with improved clinical outcomes.