Early Diagnosis and Treatment of COPD and Asthma - A Randomized, Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Many persons with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) or asthma have not received a diagnosis, so their respiratory symptoms remain largely untreated. METHODS: We used a case-finding method to identify adults in the community with respiratory symptoms without diagnosed lung disease. Participants who were found to have undiagnosed COPD or asthma on spirometry were enrolled in a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial to determine whether early diagnosis and treatment reduces health care utilization for respiratory illness and improves health outcomes. Participants were assigned to receive the intervention (evaluation by a pulmonologist and an asthma-COPD educator who were instructed to initiate guideline-based care) or usual care by their primary care practitioner. The primary outcome was the annualized rate of participant-initiated health care utilization for respiratory illness. Secondary outcomes included changes from baseline to 1 year in disease-specific quality of life, as assessed with the St. George Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ; scores range from 0 to 100, with lower scores indicating better health status); symptom burden, as assessed with the COPD Assessment Test (CAT; scores range from 0 to 40, with lower scores indicating better health status); and forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1). RESULTS: Of 38,353 persons interviewed, 595 were found to have undiagnosed COPD or asthma and 508 underwent randomization: 253 were assigned to the intervention group and 255 to the usual-care group. The annualized rate of a primary-outcome event was lower in the intervention group than in the usual-care group (0.53 vs. 1.12 events per person-year; incidence rate ratio, 0.48; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.36 to 0.63; P<0.001). At 12 months, the SGRQ score was lower than the baseline score by 10.2 points in the intervention group and by 6.8 points in the usual-care group (difference, -3.5 points; 95% CI, -6.0 to -0.9), and the CAT score was lower than the baseline score by 3.8 points and 2.6 points, respectively (difference, -1.3 points; 95% CI, -2.4 to -0.1). The FEV1 increased by 119 ml in the intervention group and by 22 ml in the usual-care group (difference, 94 ml; 95% CI, 50 to 138). The incidence of adverse events was similar in the trial groups. CONCLUSIONS: In this trial in which a strategy was used to identify adults in the community with undiagnosed asthma or COPD, those who received pulmonologist-directed treatment had less subsequent health care utilization for respiratory illness than those who received usual care. (Funded by Canadian Institutes of Health Research; UCAP ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03148210.).

Impact of Undiagnosed Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and Asthma on Symptoms, Quality of Life, Healthcare Use, and Work Productivity.

Rationale: A significant proportion of individuals with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and asthma remain undiagnosed. Objectives: The objective of this study was to evaluate symptoms, quality of life, healthcare use, and work productivity in subjects with undiagnosed COPD or asthma compared with those previously diagnosed, as well as healthy control subjects. Methods: This multicenter population-based case-finding study randomly recruited adults with respiratory symptoms who had no previous history of diagnosed lung disease from 17 Canadian centers using random digit dialing. Participants who exceeded symptom thresholds on the Asthma Screening Questionnaire or the COPD Diagnostic Questionnaire underwent pre- and post-bronchodilator spirometry to determine if they met diagnostic criteria for COPD or asthma. Two control groups, a healthy group without respiratory symptoms and a symptomatic group with previously diagnosed COPD or asthma, were similarly recruited. Measurements and Main Results: A total of 26,905 symptomatic individuals were interviewed, and 4,272 subjects were eligible. Of these, 2,857 completed pre- and post-bronchodilator spirometry, and 595 (21%) met diagnostic criteria for COPD or asthma. Individuals with undiagnosed COPD or asthma reported greater impact of symptoms on health status and daily activities, worse disease-specific and general quality of life, greater healthcare use, and poorer work productivity than healthy control subjects. Individuals with undiagnosed asthma had symptoms, quality of life, and healthcare use burden similar to those of individuals with previously diagnosed asthma, whereas subjects with undiagnosed COPD were less disabled than those with previously diagnosed COPD. Conclusions: Undiagnosed COPD or asthma imposes important, unmeasured burdens on the healthcare system and is associated with poor health status and negative effects on work productivity.

Patient and physician factors associated with symptomatic undiagnosed asthma or COPD.

BACKGROUND: It remains unclear why some symptomatic individuals with asthma or COPD remain undiagnosed. Here, we compare patient and physician characteristics between symptomatic individuals with obstructive lung disease (OLD) who are undiagnosed and individuals with physician-diagnosed OLD. METHODS: Using random-digit dialling and population-based case finding, we recruited 451 participants with symptomatic undiagnosed OLD and 205 symptomatic control participants with physician-diagnosed OLD. Data on symptoms, quality of life and healthcare utilisation were analysed. We surveyed family physicians of participants in both groups to elucidate differences in physician practices that could contribute to undiagnosed OLD. RESULTS: Participants with undiagnosed OLD had lower mean pre-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 s percentage predicted compared with those who were diagnosed (75.2% versus 80.8%; OR 0.975, 95% CI 0.963-0.987). They reported greater psychosocial impacts due to symptoms and worse energy and fatigue than those with diagnosed OLD. Undiagnosed OLD was more common in participants whose family physicians were practising for >15 years and in those whose physicians reported that they were likely to prescribe respiratory medications without doing spirometry. Undiagnosed OLD was more common among participants who had never undergone spirometry (OR 10.83, 95% CI 6.18-18.98) or who were never referred to a specialist (OR 5.92, 95% CI 3.58-9.77). Undiagnosed OLD was less common among participants who had required emergency department care (OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.20-0.97). CONCLUSIONS: Individuals with symptomatic undiagnosed OLD have worse pre-bronchodilator lung function and present with greater psychosocial impacts on quality of life compared with their diagnosed counterparts. They were less likely to have received appropriate investigations and specialist referral for their respiratory symptoms.

Derivation and validation of the UCAP-Q case-finding questionnaire to detect undiagnosed asthma and COPD.

BACKGROUND: Many people with asthma and COPD remain undiagnosed. We developed and validated a new case-finding questionnaire to identify symptomatic adults with undiagnosed obstructive lung disease. METHODS: Adults in the community with no prior history of physician-diagnosed lung disease who self-reported respiratory symptoms were contacted via random-digit dialling. Pre- and post-bronchodilator spirometry was used to confirm asthma or COPD. Predictive questions were selected using multinomial logistic regression with backward elimination. Questionnaire performance was assessed using sensitivity, predictive values and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). The questionnaire was assessed for test-retest reliability, acceptability and readability. External validation was prospectively conducted in an independent sample and predictive performance re-evaluated. RESULTS: A 13-item Undiagnosed COPD and Asthma Population Questionnaire (UCAP-Q) case-finding questionnaire to predict undiagnosed asthma or COPD was developed. The most appropriate risk cut-off was determined to be 6% for either disease. Applied to the derivation sample (n=1615), the questionnaire yielded a sensitivity of 92% for asthma and 97% for COPD; specificity of 17%; and an AUC of 0.69 (95% CI 0.64-0.74) for asthma and 0.82 (95% CI 0.78-0.86) for COPD. Prospective validation using an independent sample (n=471) showed sensitivities of 93% and 92% for asthma and COPD, respectively; specificity of 19%; with AUCs of 0.70 (95% CI 0.62-0.79) for asthma and 0.81 (95% CI 0.74-0.87) for COPD. AUCs for UCAP-Q were higher compared to AUCs for currently recommended case-finding questionnaires for asthma or COPD. CONCLUSIONS: The UCAP-Q demonstrated high sensitivities and AUCs for identifying undiagnosed asthma or COPD. A web-based calculator allows for easy calculation of risk probabilities for each disease.

Population-based case-finding to identify subjects with undiagnosed asthma or COPD.

BACKGROUND: ∼5-10% of adults may have undiagnosed airflow obstruction. The objective of this study was to develop a population-based case-finding strategy to assess the prevalence of undiagnosed airflow obstruction (asthma or COPD) amongst adults with respiratory symptoms in Canada. METHODS: Adults without a previous history of asthma, COPD or lung disease were recruited using random digit-dialling and asked if they had symptoms of dyspnoea, cough, sputum or wheeze within the past 6 months. Those who answered affirmatively completed the Asthma Screening Questionnaire (ASQ), COPD-Diagnostic Questionnaire (COPD-DQ) and COPD Assessment Test (CAT). Those with an ASQ score of ≥6 or a COPD-DQ score of ≥20 underwent pre- and post-bronchodilator spirometry to diagnose asthma or COPD. RESULTS: 12 117 individuals were contacted at home and assessed for study eligibility. Of the 1260 eligible individuals, 910 (72%) enrolled and underwent spirometry. Ultimately, 184 subjects (20% of those enrolled) had obstructive lung disease (73 asthma and 111 COPD). Individuals found to have undiagnosed asthma or COPD had more severe respiratory symptoms and impaired quality of life compared with those without airflow obstruction. The ASQ, COPD-DQ, and CAT had ROC areas for predicting undiagnosed asthma or COPD of 0.49, 0.64 and 0.56, respectively. Four descriptive variables (age, BMI, sex and pack-years smoked) produced better receiver operating characteristic (ROC) values than the questionnaires (ROC area=0.68). CONCLUSION: 20% of randomly selected individuals who report respiratory symptoms in Canada have undiagnosed airflow obstruction due to asthma or COPD. Questionnaires could exclude subjects at low risk but lack the ability to accurately find subjects with undiagnosed disease.

Reevaluation of Diagnosis in Adults With Physician-Diagnosed Asthma.

Importance: Although asthma is a chronic disease, the expected rate of spontaneous remissions of adult asthma and the stability of diagnosis are unknown. Objective: To determine whether a diagnosis of current asthma could be ruled out and asthma medications safely stopped in randomly selected adults with physician-diagnosed asthma. Design, Setting, and Participants: A prospective, multicenter cohort study was conducted in 10 Canadian cities from January 2012 to February 2016. Random digit dialing was used to recruit adult participants who reported a history of physician-diagnosed asthma established within the past 5 years. Participants using long-term oral steroids and participants unable to be tested using spirometry were excluded. Information from the diagnosing physician was obtained to determine how the diagnosis of asthma was originally made in the community. Of 1026 potential participants who fulfilled eligibility criteria during telephone screening, 701 (68.3%) agreed to enter into the study. All participants were assessed with home peak flow and symptom monitoring, spirometry, and serial bronchial challenge tests, and those participants using daily asthma medications had their medications gradually tapered off over 4 study visits. Participants in whom a diagnosis of current asthma was ultimately ruled out were followed up clinically with repeated bronchial challenge tests over 1 year. Exposure: Physician-diagnosed asthma established within the past 5 years. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the proportion of participants in whom a diagnosis of current asthma was ruled out, defined as participants who exhibited no evidence of acute worsening of asthma symptoms, reversible airflow obstruction, or bronchial hyperresponsiveness after having all asthma medications tapered off and after a study pulmonologist established an alternative diagnosis. Secondary outcomes included the proportion with asthma ruled out after 12 months and the proportion who underwent an appropriate initial diagnostic workup for asthma in the community. Results: Of 701 participants (mean [SD] age, 51 [16] years; 467 women [67%]), 613 completed the study and could be conclusively evaluated for a diagnosis of current asthma. Current asthma was ruled out in 203 of 613 study participants (33.1%; 95% CI, 29.4%-36.8%). Twelve participants (2.0%) were found to have serious cardiorespiratory conditions that had been previously misdiagnosed as asthma in the community. After an additional 12 months of follow-up, 181 participants (29.5%; 95% CI, 25.9%-33.1%) continued to exhibit no clinical or laboratory evidence of asthma. Participants in whom current asthma was ruled out, compared with those in whom it was confirmed, were less likely to have undergone testing for airflow limitation in the community at the time of initial diagnosis (43.8% vs 55.6%, respectively; absolute difference, 11.8%; 95% CI, 2.1%-21.5%). Conclusions and Relevance: Among adults with physician-diagnosed asthma, a current diagnosis of asthma could not be established in 33.1% who were not using daily asthma medications or had medications weaned. In patients such as these, reassessing the asthma diagnosis may be warranted.

Emerging therapeutic options for the treatment of patients with symptomatic asthma.

OBJECTIVE: Asthma is a chronic inflammatory disorder of the airways with increasing worldwide prevalence. Despite treatment according to guidelines, a considerable proportion of patients with asthma remain symptomatic. Different potential therapeutic options for the treatment of these patients are currently in development and undergoing clinical trials, and it is important to regularly review their status. DATA SOURCES: A search of ClinicalTrials.gov was performed and supported by a PubMed literature search and restricted to the previous 10 years to ensure currency of data. The results were manually filtered to identify relevant articles. STUDY SELECTIONS: Emerging therapies that are currently in phase 2 and 3 development include anti-interleukin agents (benralizumab, reslizumab, dupilumab, brodalumab, lebrikizumab, and mepolizumab), a chemoattractant receptor-homologous molecule expressed on a T-helper type 2 lymphocyte antagonist (OC000459), a phosphodiesterase-4 inhibitor (roflumilast), and long-acting muscarinic antagonists (glycopyrronium bromide, umeclidinium bromide, and tiotropium bromide). RESULTS: The clinical trial program of the long-acting muscarinic antagonist tiotropium is currently the most advanced, with data available from different phase 2 and 3 studies. Results demonstrate that it is an efficacious add-on to at least inhaled corticosteroid maintenance therapy across severities of symptomatic asthma. CONCLUSION: The results of ongoing and future studies will help to determine whether these emerging therapeutic options will help address the unmet need for improvement in asthma management.

Do we know the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for COPD exacerbations?

Frequent exacerbations of COPD are associated with accelerated loss of lung function, declining health status, increased mortality, and increased health care costs. Thus, a key objective in the management of COPD is preventing exacerbations or at least reducing their number and severity. When new interventions are examined, their value is sometimes assessed in reference to the minimal clinically important difference (MCID), a theoretical construct that may be defined and estimated numerically in several different ways. There have been limited attempts to calculate the MCID for COPD exacerbations but a figure of 20% reduction in exacerbation frequency is occasionally cited as the "established" MCID from a single manuscript reviewing six clinical trials. Our review suggests that defining and calculating the MCID for COPD exacerbations is problematic, not only because the methodology around developing endpoints for MCIDs is inconsistent, but because the impact of exacerbation reduction is likely to be influenced dramatically by the definitions of exacerbation severity used and the population's baseline status. Reference to current literature shows that at least one other estimate for exacerbation MCID as low as 4%. MCID is sometimes estimated by expert consensus; a review of articles used to shape COPD guidelines shows frequent reference to articles in which interventions yielded exacerbation differences as low as 11%. We find no evidence of an established MCID but suggest that interventions reducing exacerbations by as little as 11% appear to be regarded widely as clinically important.

Disease burden in individuals with symptomatic undiagnosed asthma or COPD.

BACKGROUND: The actual burden of COPD and asthma may be much higher than appreciated, since a large proportion of individuals are not diagnosed. Our study objective was to compare health care utilization, burden of symptoms and quality of life in subjects with self-reported respiratory symptoms who were subsequently found to have undiagnosed airflow obstruction compared to those having no airflow obstruction. METHODS: This cross-sectional case-finding study used data from the Undiagnosed COPD and Asthma Population (UCAP) study. Adult subjects with respiratory symptoms who had no history of diagnosed lung disease were recruited in a two-step case-finding process using random digit-dialling of land lines and cell phones located within a 90-min radius of 16 Canadian study sites. Participants were assessed for COPD, asthma or no airflow obstruction using pre- and post-bronchodilator spirometry based on American Thoracic Society diagnostic criteria. RESULTS: 1660 participants were recruited, of these 1615 had adequate spirometry and 331 (20.5%) subjects met spirometry criteria for undiagnosed asthma or COPD. Subjects with undiagnosed asthma or COPD had increased respiratory symptoms as assessed by the COPD Assessment Test (CAT), and higher St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) scores indicating worse health-related quality of life, compared to subjects with no airflow obstruction. No between-group differences were found in health care utilization or work or school absenteeism. CONCLUSION: Undiagnosed asthma and COPD are common in Canadian adults experiencing breathing problems and are associated with a greater burden of symptoms and poorer health-related quality of life. These results suggest that patients may benefit from early identification and treatment of undiagnosed asthma and COPD.

Triple therapy for the management of COPD: a review.

Triple therapy for COPD consists of a long-acting anti-cholinergic bronchodilator, a long-acting beta-agonist bronchodilator, and an inhaled corticosteroid. Guidelines from the Canadian Thoracic Society advocate triple therapy for some patients with moderate-to-severe COPD. The objective of this review was to evaluate the evidence based clinical efficacy of triple therapy compared to dual bronchodilator therapy (long-acting anti-cholinergic bronchodilator + beta-agonist bronchodilator) or long-acting anti-cholinergic bronchodilator monotherapy for managing COPD. A systematic literature search was conducted to identify relevant clinical evaluations of triple therapy in the management of moderate to severe COPD. Databases searched included: Medline; EMBASE; CINAHL and PubMed (non-Medline records only). Of 2,314 publications, 4 articles evaluated triple therapy for the management of COPD. Hospitalization rates for COPD exacerbations, reported in 2 trials, were significantly reduced with triple therapy compared to long-acting anti-cholinergic bronchodilator monotherapy, with reported relative risks of 0.53 (95% CI: 0.33, 0.86, p = 0.01) and 0.35 (95% CI: 0.16-0.78, p = 0.011). Exacerbation data is inconsistent between the two trials reporting this outcome. Lung function, dyspnea and quality of life data show statistical significant changes with triple therapy compared to long-acting anti-cholinergic bronchodilator monotherapy but the changes do not reach clinical importance. Triple therapy does decrease the number of hospitalizations for severe/acute COPD exacerbations compared with long-acting anti-cholinergic bronchodilator monotherapy. There is insufficient evidence to determine if triple therapy is superior to dual bronchodilator therapy.

Women with COPD.

Health inequalities regarding gender are extremely prevalent, and specifically in conditions such as COPD. No woman should ever be dismissed in regard to their health and underlying medical history. https://bit.ly/2X7Klmd.

Performance Characteristics of Spirometry With Negative Bronchodilator Response and Methacholine Challenge Testing and Implications for Asthma Diagnosis.

BACKGROUND: In patients with a history suggestive of asthma, diagnosis is usually confirmed by spirometry with bronchodilator response (BDR) or confirmatory methacholine challenge testing (MCT). RESEARCH QUESTION: We examined the proportion of participants with negative BDR testing who had a positive MCT (and its predictors) result and characteristics of MCT, including effects of controller medication tapering and temporal variability (and predictors of MCT result change), and concordance between MCT and pulmonologist asthma diagnosis. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Adults with self-reported physician-diagnosed asthma were recruited by random-digit dialing across Canada. Subjects performed spirometry with BDR testing and returned for MCT if testing was nondiagnostic for asthma. Subjects on controllers underwent medication tapering with serial MCTs over 3 to 6 weeks. Subjects with a negative MCT (the provocative concentration of methacholine that results in a 20% drop in FEV1 [PC20] > 8 mg/mL) off medications were examined by a pulmonologist and had serial MCTs after 6 and 12 months. RESULTS: Of 500 subjects (50.5 ± 16.6 years old, 68.0% female) with a negative BDR test for asthma, 215 (43.0%) had a positive MCT. Subjects with prebronchodilator airflow limitation were more likely to have a positive MCT (OR, 1.90; 95% CI, 1.17-3.04). MCT converted from negative to positive, with medication tapering in 18 of 94 (19.1%) participants, and spontaneously over time in 25 of 165 (15.2%) participants. Of 231 subjects with negative MCT, 28 (12.1%) subsequently received an asthma diagnosis from a pulmonologist. INTERPRETATION: In subjects with a self-reported physician diagnosis of asthma, absence of bronchodilator reversibility had a negative predictive value of only 57% to exclude asthma. A finding of spirometric airflow limitation significantly increased chances of asthma. MCT results varied with medication taper and over time, and pulmonologists were sometimes prepared to give a clinical diagnosis of asthma despite negative MCT. Correspondingly, in patients for whom a high clinical suspicion of asthma exists, repeat testing appears to be warranted.

Overdiagnosis of asthma in obese and nonobese adults.

BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether asthma is overdiagnosed in developed countries, particularly among obese individuals, who may be more likely than nonobese people to experience dyspnea. METHODS: We conducted a longitudinal study involving nonobese (body mass index 20-25) and obese (body mass index >/= 30) individuals with asthma that had been diagnosed by a physician. Participants were recruited from 8 Canadian cities by means of random-digit dialing. A diagnosis of current asthma was excluded in those who did not have evidence of acute worsening of asthma symptoms, reversible airflow obstruction or bronchial hyperresponsiveness, despite being weaned off asthma medications. We stopped asthma medications in those in whom a diagnosis of asthma was excluded and assessed their clinical outcomes over 6 months. RESULTS: Of 540 individuals with physician-diagnosed asthma who participated in the study, 496 (242 obese and 254 nonobese) could be conclusively assessed for a diagnosis of asthma. Asthma was ultimately excluded in 31.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] 26.3%-37.9%) in the obese group and in 28.7% (95% CI 23.5%-34.6%) in the nonobese group. Overdiagnosis of asthma was no more likely to occur among obese individuals than among nonobese individuals (p = 0.46). Of those in whom asthma was excluded, 65.5% did not need to take asthma medication or seek health care services because of asthma symptoms during a 6-month follow-up period. INTERPRETATION: About one-third of obese and nonobese individuals with physician-diagnosed asthma did not have asthma when objectively assessed. This finding suggests that, in developed countries such as Canada, asthma is overdiagnosed.

Influence of current or former smoking on asthma management and control.

BACKGROUND: In patients with asthma, smoking has been associated with accelerated decline in pulmonary function, poor disease control and reduced responsiveness to corticosteroids. OBJECTIVE: To assess the influence of current and former smoking on self-reported asthma control and health care use in a large population of asthma patients. METHODS: The present analysis was conducted following a telephone survey of adult Canadians aged 18 to 54 years who had physician-diagnosed asthma and a smoking history of less than 20 pack-years. RESULTS: Of 893 patients, 268 were former smokers and 108 were current smokers. Daytime and nighttime symptoms, absenteeism from work or school, emergency care use for asthma in the past year, and use of a short-acting bronchodilator without controller medication were reported more frequently by current smokers than nonsmokers and former smokers. Former smokers were not significantly different from nonsmokers with respect to most asthma outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Current smokers with asthma show evidence of poorer asthma control and greater acute care needs than lifelong nonsmokers or former smokers. These observations stress the importance of smoking cessation to help achieve asthma control.

Approach to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in primary care.

OBJECTIVE: To review the diagnosis, assessment of severity, and management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and to address the systemic manifestations associated with COPD. SOURCES OF INFORMATION: PubMed was searched from January 2000 to December 2007 using the key words COPD, practice guidelines, randomized controlled trials, therapy, and health outcomes. The Canadian Thoracic Society guideline on management of COPD was carefully reviewed. The authors, who have extensive experience in care of patients with COPD, provided expert opinion. MAIN MESSAGE: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease is a common systemic disease caused primarily by smoking. Spirometry is essential for diagnosis of COPD and should be integrated into primary care practice. Pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic therapy improves symptoms, capacity for exercise, and quality of life. Smoking cessation is the only intervention shown to slow disease progression. The systemic manifestations and comorbidity associated with COPD need to be identified and addressed to optimize health and quality of life. CONCLUSION: An evidence-based approach to managing COPD along with a primary care chronic disease management model could improve quality of life for patients with COPD.

Optimizing the Delivery of Inhaled Medication for Respiratory Patients: The Role of Valved Holding Chambers.

Valved holding chambers (VHCs) have been used with pressurized metered-dose inhalers since the early 1980s. They have been shown to increase fine particle delivery to the lungs, decrease oropharyngeal deposition, and reduce side effects such as throat irritation, dysphonia, and oral candidiasis that are common with use of pressurized metered-dose inhalers (pMDIs) alone. VHCs act as aerosol reservoirs, allowing the user to actuate the pMDI device and then inhale the medication in a two-step process that helps users overcome challenges in coordinating pMDI actuation with inhalation. The design of VHC devices can have an impact on performance. Features such as antistatic properties, effective face-to-facemask seal feedback whistles indicating correct inhalation speed, and inhalation indicators all help improve function and performance, and have been demonstrated to improve asthma control, reduce the rate of exacerbations, and improve quality of life. Not all VHCs are the same, and they are not interchangeable. Each pairing of a pMDI device plus VHC should be considered as a unique delivery system.

Between-Visit Variability in FEV1 as a Diagnostic Test for Asthma in Adults.

RATIONALE: The reliability of using between-visit variation in forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) to diagnose asthma is understudied, and hence uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether FEV1 variability measured over recurrent visits is significantly associated with a diagnosis of current asthma. METHODS: Randomly selected adults (N = 964) with a history of physician-diagnosed asthma were studied from 2005 to 2007 and from 2012 to 2016. A diagnosis of current asthma was confirmed in those participants who exhibited bronchial hyperresponsiveness to methacholine and/or acute worsening of asthma symptoms while being weaned off asthma medications. Regression analyses and receiver operating curves were used to evaluate the ability of between-visit FEV1 variability to diagnose asthma. RESULTS: A current diagnosis of asthma was confirmed in 584 of 964 participants (60%). Between-visit absolute variability in FEV1 was significantly greater in those in whom current asthma was confirmed, compared with those in whom current asthma was ruled out (7.3% vs. 4.8%; mean difference between the two groups, 2.5%; 95% confidence interval, 1.7-3.3%). However, a 12% and 200-ml between-visit variation in FEV1, which is the diagnostic threshold recommended by Global Initiative for Asthma, exhibited a sensitivity of only 0.17 and a specificity of 0.94 for confirming current asthma. A between-visit absolute variability in FEV1 ≥ 12% and 200 ml increased the pretest probability of asthma from 60% to a posttest probability of 81%. CONCLUSIONS: A 12% and 200-ml between-visit variation in FEV1, if present, has reasonably good specificity for diagnosing asthma, but has poor sensitivity compared with bronchial challenge testing. Between-visit variability in FEV1 is a relatively unhelpful test to establish a diagnosis of asthma.

Asthma control in Canada: no improvement since we last looked in 1999.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether asthma control in Canada had improved since the last major survey in 1999 by exploring how well patients' asthma was controlled, how much they knew about asthma control, and how they used health care resources. DESIGN: National telephone survey of patients between April and August 2004. SETTING: Canada. PARTICIPANTS: Eight hundred ninety-three adults 18 to 54 years old diagnosed with asthma more than 6 months before the survey. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Patients' control of their asthma, patients' knowledge about asthma, the frequency and duration of periods of worsening asthma, and patients' use of health care resources to manage those periods. RESULTS: In total, 26,210 households listed in a consumer database were contacted. Excluding ineligible households and households with a language barrier, a member of 13% of the households completed the 35-minute survey. Based on definitions in Canadian guidelines, 53% of patients had symptomatic uncontrolled asthma. In the previous year, almost all asthma patients had experienced worsening of symptoms that lasted on average 13.6 days for patients with uncontrolled asthma and 8.0 days for patients with controlled asthma (P < .02). Markedly more patients with uncontrolled asthma used health care resources for episodes of asthma than patients with controlled asthma did (72% vs 15% for urgent office visits, P < .01; 32% vs 3% for emergency department visits, P < .01; and 7% vs 0% for hospitalizations, P < .01) in the year before the survey. Patients were confused about the differences between reliever and controller medications. One third of patients claimed that no one had taught them about asthma medications, and one quarter said they had received no training on how to recognize the early signs of asthma worsening. CONCLUSION: Asthma control and management remained suboptimal in Canada and relatively unchanged since the previous major survey in 1999.