S'abonner

A comparison of five surveys that identify individuals at risk for airflow obstruction and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease - 04/11/16

Doi : 10.1016/j.rmed.2016.09.010 
Folarin Sogbetun a, William L. Eschenbacher a, b, Jeffrey A. Welge c, Ralph J. Panos a, b,
a Division of Pulmonary, Critical Care, and Sleep Medicine, Cincinnati Veterans Affairs Medical Center, United States 
b Division of Pulmonary, Critical Care, and Sleep Medicine, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, United States 
c Department of Psychiatry & Behavioral Neuroscience, Department of Environmental Health (Division of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics), University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, United States 

Corresponding author. Department of Medicine, Division of Pulmonary, Critical Care and Sleep Medicine, Cincinnati Veteran Affairs Medical Center, 3200 Vine Street, Cincinnati, OH, 45220, United States.Department of Medicine, Division of Pulmonary, Critical Care and Sleep MedicineCincinnati Veteran Affairs Medical Center3200 Vine StreetCincinnatiOH45220United States

Abstract

Background

The predictive characteristics of different screening surveys for the recognition of individuals at risk for airflow obstruction (AFO) have not been evaluated simultaneously in the same population.

Purpose

To compare five AFO/COPD screening questionnaires.

Methods

383 individuals completed the Veterans Airflow Obstruction Screening Questionnaire, Personal Level Screener for COPD (VAFOSQ), the 11-Q COPD Screening Questionnaire (11-Q), the COPD Population Screener (COPD-PS) and the Lung Function Questionnaire (LFQ) and performed spirometry. AFO was defined as forced expiratory volume in one second divided by the forced vital capacity (FEV1/FVC) < 0.7, fixed ratio (FR) or FEV1/FVC < lower limit of normal (LLN). The predictive characteristics of the five questionnaires were calculated and non-parametric receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves estimated by logistic regression.

Results

376 participants completed at least two of the questionnaires and performed technically acceptable spirometry. AFO was present in 102 (27.1%) and 150 (39.9%) based on LLN and FR, respectively. The number of individuals positively selected by the VAFOSQ was 227, PLS 128, 11-Q 236, COPD-PS 217, and LFQ 328. The area under the ROC curves for the questionnaires was between 0.60 and 0.66 (LLN) and 0.58 and 0.66 (FR).

Conclusions

Although these screening surveys have acceptable and similar predictive ability for the identification of AFO, their published thresholds lead to substantially different classification rates. The choice of an appropriate threshold for the identification of individuals with possible AFO/COPD should consider the underlying prevalence of AFO/COPD in the target population and the relative costs of misclassifying affected and unaffected cases.

Clinical Trial Registration

None.

Primary Source of Funding

Veterans Health Administration.

Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.

Keywords : Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, Screening, Questionnaire


Plan


 These results have been presented in abstract form at the American Thoracic Society meeting, May, 2015, Denver, CO.


© 2016  Publié par Elsevier Masson SAS.
Imprimer
Export

    Export citations

  • Fichier

  • Contenu

Vol 120

P. 1-9 - novembre 2016 Retour au numéro
Article précédent Article précédent
  • Low risk of adverse obstetrical and perinatal outcome in pregnancies complicated by asthma: A case control study
  • Zarqa Ali, Lisbeth Nilas, Charlotte Suppli Ulrik
| Article suivant Article suivant
  • A multicenter, randomized, double-blind dose-ranging study of glycopyrrolate/formoterol fumarate fixed-dose combination metered dose inhaler compared to the monocomponents and open-label tiotropium dry powder inhaler in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD
  • Donald P. Tashkin, Fernando J. Martinez, Roberto Rodriguez-Roisin, Charles Fogarty, Mark Gotfried, Michael Denenberg, Gregory Gottschlich, James F. Donohue, Chad Orevillo, Patrick Darken, Earl St Rose, Shannon Strom, Tracy Fischer, Michael Golden, Colin Reisner

Déjà abonné à cette revue ?