Riesgos, fenotipos y comparación de tratamiento de EPOC en atención primaria según guías GOLD y GesEPOC / Risks, phenotypes and comparison between treatments according to guidelines GOLD and GesEPOC in primary care

Introducción La enfermedad pulmonar obstructiva crónica (EPOC) es una patología infradiagnosticada, con una elevada morbimortalidad. El diagnóstico y el seguimiento se realizan en gran parte en atención primaria (AP). El objetivo de nuestro estudio es clasificar los pacientes EPOC de acuerdo con GOLD 2019 y GesEPOC 2017. Como objetivos secundarios, analizar el tipo de riesgo, describir y comparar el tratamiento pautado con el recomendado por las guías. Material y métodos Estudio observacional transversal multicéntrico realizado en siete equipos de AP. Se incluyeron 637 pacientes EPOC entre 35 y 85años. Resultado La edad media fue de 70,3años, el 84,6% tenían comorbilidades y el 43,5% eran fumadores activos. El FEV1 post-broncodilatador medio fue del 61,92% (DE: 17,42). Predominaron los pacientes con mMRC=1 (43,8%), 57,8% CAT<10. Índice BODEx leve (75,7%). GoldA fue mayoritario (47,7%). El fenotipo más frecuente fue el no agudizador (61,1%). El 25% fueron ACO. El 56,2% eran pacientes de bajo riesgo. El 20,6% no tenían prescrito ningún tratamiento, LABA +LAMA +CI (19,6%), LAMA +LABA (16,5%) y LAMA (16,3%). Si comparamos los tratamientos que tienen pautados los pacientes con lo que recomienda la GOLD, obtenemos que el 61% coinciden con una concordancia moderada, mientras que si los comparamos con la GesEPOC, el 53,8% coinciden con concordancia débil. El 73,4% de los tratamientos coinciden entre ambos documentos (concordancia moderada). Conclusiones Los pacientes EPOC atendidos en AP son de bajo riesgo, leves y no agudizadores. Si comparamos los tratamientos que tienen pautados los pacientes con lo que recomiendan la GOLD y la GesEPOC, encontramos una concordancia moderada y débil, respectivamente (AU)

Introduction Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is an underdiagnosed pathology with a high morbidity and mortality. Diagnosis and follow-up are mostly carried out in primary care (PC). The objective of our study is to classify COPD patients according to GOLD 2019 and GesEPOC 2017 guidelines. As secondary objectives, to analyze the type of risk and to describe and compare the prescribed treatment with that recommended by the guidelines. Material and methods Multicenter cross-sectional observational study in seven Health Care centers. 637 COPD patients between 35 and 85years old were included. Results The mean age was 70.3years old, 84.6% had comorbidities and 43.5% were active smokers. The mean post-bronchodilator FEV1 was 61.92% (SD: 17.42). Most are patients with mMRC=1 (43.8%), 57.8% CAT<10. Mild BODEx index (75.7%). GoldA was the majority (47.7%). The most frequent phenotype was non-exacerbator (61.1%). 25% were ACOs. 56.2% were low-risk patients. 20.6% had not been prescribed any treatment, LABA +LAMA +CI (19.6%), LAMA +LABA (16.5%) and LAMA (16.3%). If we compare the treatments that the patients have prescribed, with the one is recommended by GOLD, we obtain that 61% coincide with moderate concordance, while if we compare with GesEPOC, 53.8% coincide with weak concordance. 73.4% of the treatments coincide between both documents (moderate agreement). Conclusions COPD patients treated in PC are low risk, mild and non-exacerbators. If we compare the treatments that the patients have prescribed, with what is recommended by GOLD and GesEPOC, we find a moderate and weak concordance, respectively (AU)

[Risks, phenotypes and comparison between treatments according to guidelines GOLD and GesEPOC in primary care]. / Riesgos, fenotipos y comparación de tratamiento de EPOC en atención primaria según guías GOLD y GesEPOC.

INTRODUCTION: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is an underdiagnosed pathology with a high morbidity and mortality. Diagnosis and follow-up are mostly carried out in primary care (PC). The objective of our study is to classify COPD patients according to GOLD 2019 and GesEPOC 2017 guidelines. As secondary objectives, to analyze the type of risk and to describe and compare the prescribed treatment with that recommended by the guidelines. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Multicenter cross-sectional observational study in seven Health Care centers. 637 COPD patients between 35 and 85years old were included. RESULTS: The mean age was 70.3years old, 84.6% had comorbidities and 43.5% were active smokers. The mean post-bronchodilator FEV1 was 61.92% (SD: 17.42). Most are patients with mMRC=1 (43.8%), 57.8% CAT<10. Mild BODEx index (75.7%). GoldA was the majority (47.7%). The most frequent phenotype was non-exacerbator (61.1%). 25% were ACOs. 56.2% were low-risk patients. 20.6% had not been prescribed any treatment, LABA +LAMA +CI (19.6%), LAMA +LABA (16.5%) and LAMA (16.3%). If we compare the treatments that the patients have prescribed, with the one is recommended by GOLD, we obtain that 61% coincide with moderate concordance, while if we compare with GesEPOC, 53.8% coincide with weak concordance. 73.4% of the treatments coincide between both documents (moderate agreement). CONCLUSIONS: COPD patients treated in PC are low risk, mild and non-exacerbators. If we compare the treatments that the patients have prescribed, with what is recommended by GOLD and GesEPOC, we find a moderate and weak concordance, respectively.