Accuracy and economic evaluation of screening tests for undiagnosed COPD among hypertensive individuals in Brazil.

In Brazil, prevalence of diagnosed COPD among adults aged 40 years and over is 16% although over 70% of cases remain undiagnosed. Hypertension is common and well-recorded in primary care, and frequently co-exists with COPD because of common causes such as tobacco smoking, therefore we conducted a cross-sectional screening test accuracy study in nine Basic Health Units in Brazil, among hypertensive patients aged ≥40 years to identify the optimum screening test/combinations to detect undiagnosed COPD. We compared six index tests (four screening questionnaires, microspirometer and peak flow) against the reference test defined as those below the lower limit of normal (LLN-GLI) on quality diagnostic spirometry, with confirmed COPD at clinical review. Of 1162 participants, 6.8% (n = 79) had clinically confirmed COPD. Peak flow had a higher specificity but lower sensitivity than microspirometry (sensitivity 44.3% [95% CI 33.1, 55.9], specificity 95.5% [95% CI 94.1, 96.6]). SBQ performed well compared to the other questionnaires (sensitivity 75.9% [95% CI 65.0, 84.9], specificity 59.2% [95% CI 56.2, 62.1]). A strategy requiring both SBQ and peak flow to be positive yielded sensitivity of 39.2% (95% CI 28.4, 50.9) and specificity of 97.0% (95% CI 95.7, 97.9). The use of simple screening tests was feasible within the Brazilian primary care setting. The combination of SBQ and peak flow appeared most efficient, when considering performance of the test, cost and ease of use (costing £1690 (5554 R$) with 26.7 cases detected per 1,000 patients). However, the choice of screening tests depends on the clinical setting and availability of resources.ISRCTN registration number: 11377960.

Accuracy of Vitalograph lung monitor as a screening test for COPD in primary care.

Microspirometry may be useful as the second stage of a screening pathway among patients reporting respiratory symptoms. We assessed sensitivity and specificity of the Vitalograph® lung monitor compared with post-bronchodilator confirmatory spirometry (ndd Easy on-PC) among primary care chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients within the Birmingham COPD cohort. We report a case-control analysis within 71 general practices in the UK. Eligible patients were aged ≥40 years who were either on a clinical COPD register or reported chronic respiratory symptoms on a questionnaire. Participants performed pre- and post-bronchodilator microspirometry, prior to confirmatory spirometry. Out of the 544 participants, COPD was confirmed in 337 according to post-bronchodilator confirmatory spirometry. Pre-bronchodilator, using the LLN as a cut-point, the lung monitor had a sensitivity of 50.5% (95% CI 45.0%, 55.9%) and a specificity of 99.0% (95% CI 96.6%, 99.9%) in our sample. Using a fixed ratio of FEV1/FEV6 < 0.7 to define obstruction in the lung monitor, sensitivity increased (58.8%; 95% CI 53.0, 63.8) while specificity was virtually identical (98.6%; 95% CI 95.8, 99.7). Within our sample, the optimal cut-point for the lung monitor was FEV1/FEV6 < 0.78, with sensitivity of 82.8% (95% CI 78.3%, 86.7%) and specificity of 85.0% (95% CI 79.4%, 89.6%). Test performance of the lung monitor was unaffected by bronchodilation. The lung monitor could be used in primary care without a bronchodilator using a simple ratio of FEV1/FEV6 as part of a screening pathway for COPD among patients reporting respiratory symptoms.