11
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares

      International Journal of COPD (submit here)

      This international, peer-reviewed Open Access journal by Dove Medical Press focuses on pathophysiological processes underlying Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) interventions, patient focused education, and self-management protocols. Sign up for email alerts here.

      39,063 Monthly downloads/views I 2.893 Impact Factor I 5.2 CiteScore I 1.16 Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) I 0.804 Scimago Journal & Country Rank (SJR)

      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      A case scenario study for the assessment of physician’s behavior in the management of COPD: the WHY study

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Purpose

          COPD diagnosis is mainly based on clinical judgment of physicians. Physicians do not also refer to COPD guidelines in their daily practice. This study aimed to assess attitudes of physicians regarding COPD diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up and to identify the factors influencing physicians’ decisions in clinical practice.

          Patients and methods

          Fifty physicians were selected from 12 EuroStat NUTS 2 regions and asked to assess seven fictitious case scenarios. The following five scenarios described patients with COPD: Case Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) A-smoker and Case GOLD A-nonsmoker were previously undiagnosed patients presenting with dyspnea, Case GOLD D-smoker and GOLD B-exsmoker were COPD patients presenting with exacerbation, Case GOLD B-smoker was a previously diagnosed COPD patient with dyspnea in stable phase, Case asthma–COPD overlap syndrome, and Case obesity hypoventilation syndrome. Patients’ history, physical examination findings, pulmonary function tests, and X-ray images were prepared before the study by an experts’ committee and provided to the physicians upon their request, until they reached a final decision. The physicians completed a questionnaire including information about their clinical practices and institutions.

          Results

          According to the GOLD 2015 recommendations, of the physicians, 44% performed guideline-concordant diagnosis in the first five scenarios, who were all COPD patients, and 6% performed guideline-concordant diagnosis in all cases. There was a negative correlation between high workload and making a guideline-concordant diagnosis ( P=0.038, rho =−0.417). Even when the physicians made a guideline-concordant diagnosis of COPD, only a minority (10%–22%) used the GOLD classification. Logistic regression analysis revealed that working in a tertiary health care center was a significant factor in favor of establishing a guideline-concordant diagnosis of COPD ( P=0.029, OR =6.139 [95% CI: 1.20–31.32]).

          Conclusion

          Management of COPD patients in Turkey does not generally follow the GOLD criteria but is rather based on physicians’ clinical experience. Heavy workload appears to adversely affect the correctness of clinical decisions.

          Most cited references16

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          GOLD 2011 disease severity classification in COPDGene: a prospective cohort study.

          The 2011 GOLD (Global Strategy for the Diagnosis, Management, and Prevention of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease [COPD]) consensus report uses symptoms, exacerbation history, and forced expiratory volume (FEV1)% to categorise patients according to disease severity and guide treatment. We aimed to assess both the influence of symptom instrument choice on patient category assignment and prospective exacerbation risk by category. Patients were recruited from 21 centres in the USA, as part of the COPDGene study. Eligible patients were aged 45-80 years, had smoked for 10 pack-years or more, and had an FEV1/forced vital capacity (FVC) <0·7. Categories were defined with the modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) dyspnoea scale (score 0-1 vs ≥2) and the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ; ≥25 vs <25 as a surrogate for the COPD Assessment Test [CAT] ≥10 vs <10) in addition to COPD exacerbations in the previous year (<2 vs ≥ 2), and lung function (FEV1% predicted ≥50 vs <50). Statistical comparisons were done with k-sample permutation tests. This study cohort is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00608764. 4484 patients with COPD were included in this analysis. Category assignment using the mMRC scale versus SGRQ were similar but not identical. On the basis of the mMRC scale, 1507 (33·6%) patients were assigned to category A, 919 (20·5%) to category B, 355 (7·9%) to category C, and 1703 (38·0%) to category D; on the basis of the SGRQ, 1317 (29·4%) patients were assigned to category A, 1109 (24·7%) to category B, 221 (4·9%) to category C, and 1837 (41·0%) to category D (κ coefficient for agreement, 0·77). Significant heterogeneity in prospective exacerbation rates (exacerbations/person-years) were seen, especially in the D subcategories, depending on the risk factor that determined category assignment (lung function only [0·89, 95% CI 0·78-1·00]), previous exacerbation history only [1·34, 1·0-1·6], or both [1·86, 1·6-2·1; p<0·0001]). The GOLD classification emphasises the importance of symptoms and exacerbation risk when assessing COPD severity. The choice of symptom measure influences category assignment. The relative number of patients with low symptoms and high risk for exacerbations (category C) is low. Differences in exacerbation rates for patients in the highest risk category D were seen depending on whether risk was based on lung function, exacerbation history, or both. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, and the COPD Foundation through contributions from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, and Sepracor. Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            How far is real life from COPD therapy guidelines? An Italian observational study.

            According to the GOLD international guidelines, the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) should be proportional to the severity of airflow obstruction graded according to FEV(1)% predicted. Regular treatment with long-acting bronchodilators should be prescribed for symptomatic patients with FEV(1) < 80%. Inhaled corticosteroids should be added in patients with FEV(1) < 50% predicted and frequent exacerbations. To investigate whether pulmonologists follow the GOLD guidelines when prescribing treatment for COPD. A multicenter, cross-sectional, observational study was carried out in 49 Pulmonary Units evenly distributed throughout the country. For each patient the demographic, clinical data and the current therapies were registered in an electronic database. 4094 patients (mean age: 70.9 ± 9.4; males 72.4%, female 27.6%) were enrolled. Disease severity was classified as: mild (745), moderate (1722), severe (923), very severe (704). Irrespective of disease severity, inhaled corticosteroids alone or in combination with long-acting bronchodilators were used in 15.2% and 66.8% of patients, respectively. The appropriateness of the pharmacological treatment of the COPD patients was defined in accordance with the GOLD recommendations. The treatment was appropriate in 37.9% of patients and inappropriate in 62.1%, p < 0.0001. The inappropriateness was due to under-prescription in 7.2% and to over-prescription in 54.9% of patients. The presence and the number of exacerbations represented an important trigger for over-prescription at stages I and II. This study shows that there is a poor relationship between the recommendations of the GOLD international guidelines and current clinical practice, and that exacerbations may play a role in over-prescription. Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Distribution and prognostic validity of the new Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease grading classification.

              The new Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) update includes airflow limitation, history of COPD exacerbations, and symptoms to classify and grade COPD severity. We aimed to determine their distribution in 11 well-defined COPD cohorts and their prognostic validity up to 10 years to predict time to death. Spirometry in all 11 cohorts was postbronchodilator. Survival analysis and C statistics were used to compare the two GOLD systems by varying time points. Of 3,633 patients, 1,064 (33.6%) were in new GOLD patient group A (low risk, less symptoms), 515 (16.3%) were B (low risk, more symptoms), 561 (17.7%) were C (high risk, less symptoms), and 1,023 (32.3%) were D (high risk, more symptoms). There was great heterogeneity of this distribution within the cohorts ( x (2) , P < .01). No differences were seen in the C statistics of old vs new GOLD grading to predict mortality at 1 year (0.635 vs 0.639, P = .53), at 3 years (0.637 vs 0.645, P = .21), or at 10 years (0.639 vs 0.642, P = .76). The new GOLD grading produces an uneven split of the COPD population, one third each in A and D patient groups, and its prognostic validity to predict time to death is no different than the old GOLD staging based in spirometry only.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis
                Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis
                International Journal of COPD
                International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
                Dove Medical Press
                1176-9106
                1178-2005
                2018
                05 September 2018
                : 13
                : 2751-2758
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Chest Diseases, Dokuz Eylül University Medical Faculty, Izmir, Turkey, oguz.kilinc@ 123456deu.edu.tr
                [2 ]Department of Medical Management, Novartis Pharmaceuticals, Istanbul, Turkey
                [3 ]Department of Chest Diseases, Atatürk University Medical Faculty, Erzurum, Turkey
                [4 ]Department of Chest Diseases, Uludağ University Medical Faculty, Bursa, Turkey
                [5 ]Department of Chest Diseases, Ege University Medical Faculty, Izmir, Turkey
                Author notes
                Correspondence: Oguz Kilinc, Department of Chest Diseases, Dokuz Eylül University Medical Faculty, Inciraltı Mahallesi, Mithatpaşa Caddesi No 1606, 35340 Narlıdere, Balçova, Izmir, Turkey, Tel +90 53 5969 4099, Email oguz.kilinc@ 123456deu.edu.tr
                Article
                copd-13-2751
                10.2147/COPD.S154616
                6130535
                05e87391-dac4-4589-9610-27b7ebd4067d
                © 2018 Kilinc et al. This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited

                The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed.

                History
                Categories
                Original Research

                Respiratory medicine
                copd,practice pattern,real-life scenario,physician decision,gold criteria
                Respiratory medicine
                copd, practice pattern, real-life scenario, physician decision, gold criteria

                Comments

                Comment on this article