Blog
About

7
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Do not do in COPD: consensus statement on overuse

      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

          Background

          To identify practices that do not add value, cause harm, or subject patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) to a level of risk that outweighs possible benefits (overuse).

          Methods

          A qualitative approach was applied. First, a multidisciplinary group of healthcare professionals used the Metaplan technique to draft and rank a list of overused procedures as well as self-care practices in patients with stable and exacerbated COPD. Second, in successive consensus-building rounds, description files were created for each “do not do” (DND) recommendation, consisting of a definition, description, quality of supporting evidence for the recommendation, and the indicator used to measure the degree of overuse. The consensus group comprised 6 pulmonologists, 2 general practitioners, 1 nurse, and 1 physiotherapist.

          Results

          In total, 16 DND recommendations were made for patients with COPD: 6 for stable COPD, 6 for exacerbated COPD, and 4 concerning self-care.

          Conclusion

          Overuse poses a risk for patients and jeopardizes care quality. These 16 DND recommendations for COPD will lower care risks and improve disease management, facilitate communication between physicians and patients, and bolster patient ability to provide self-care.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 94

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

          Global strategy for the diagnosis, management, and prevention of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. NHLBI/WHO Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) Workshop summary.

           ,  Suzanne Hurd,  P Calverley (2001)
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Diagnosis and management of stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a clinical practice guideline update from the American College of Physicians, American College of Chest Physicians, American Thoracic Society, and European Respiratory Society.

            This guideline is an official statement of the American College of Physicians (ACP), American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP), American Thoracic Society (ATS), and European Respiratory Society (ERS). It represents an update of the 2007 ACP clinical practice guideline on diagnosis and management of stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and is intended for clinicians who manage patients with COPD. This guideline addresses the value of history and physical examination for predicting airflow obstruction; the value of spirometry for screening or diagnosis of COPD; and COPD management strategies, specifically evaluation of various inhaled therapies (anticholinergics, long-acting β-agonists, and corticosteroids), pulmonary rehabilitation programs, and supplemental oxygen therapy. This guideline is based on a targeted literature update from March 2007 to December 2009 to evaluate the evidence and update the 2007 ACP clinical practice guideline on diagnosis and management of stable COPD. RECOMMENDATION 1: ACP, ACCP, ATS, and ERS recommend that spirometry should be obtained to diagnose airflow obstruction in patients with respiratory symptoms (Grade: strong recommendation, moderate-quality evidence). Spirometry should not be used to screen for airflow obstruction in individuals without respiratory symptoms (Grade: strong recommendation, moderate-quality evidence). RECOMMENDATION 2: For stable COPD patients with respiratory symptoms and FEV(1) between 60% and 80% predicted, ACP, ACCP, ATS, and ERS suggest that treatment with inhaled bronchodilators may be used (Grade: weak recommendation, low-quality evidence). RECOMMENDATION 3: For stable COPD patients with respiratory symptoms and FEV(1) 50% predicted. (Grade: weak recommendation, moderate-quality evidence). RECOMMENDATION 7: ACP, ACCP, ATS, and ERS recommend that clinicians should prescribe continuous oxygen therapy in patients with COPD who have severe resting hypoxemia (Pao(2) ≤55 mm Hg or Spo(2) ≤88%) (Grade: strong recommendation, moderate-quality evidence).
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Tiotropium versus salmeterol for the prevention of exacerbations of COPD.

              Treatment guidelines recommend the use of inhaled long-acting bronchodilators to alleviate symptoms and reduce the risk of exacerbations in patients with moderate-to-very-severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) but do not specify whether a long-acting anticholinergic drug or a β(2)-agonist is the preferred agent. We investigated whether the anticholinergic drug tiotropium is superior to the β(2)-agonist salmeterol in preventing exacerbations of COPD. In a 1-year, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group trial, we compared the effect of treatment with 18 μg of tiotropium once daily with that of 50 μg of salmeterol twice daily on the incidence of moderate or severe exacerbations in patients with moderate-to-very-severe COPD and a history of exacerbations in the preceding year. A total of 7376 patients were randomly assigned to and treated with tiotropium (3707 patients) or salmeterol (3669 patients). Tiotropium, as compared with salmeterol, increased the time to the first exacerbation (187 days vs. 145 days), with a 17% reduction in risk (hazard ratio, 0.83; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.77 to 0.90; P<0.001). Tiotropium also increased the time to the first severe exacerbation (hazard ratio, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.61 to 0.85; P<0.001), reduced the annual number of moderate or severe exacerbations (0.64 vs. 0.72; rate ratio, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.83 to 0.96; P=0.002), and reduced the annual number of severe exacerbations (0.09 vs. 0.13; rate ratio, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.66 to 0.82; P<0.001). Overall, the incidence of serious adverse events and of adverse events leading to the discontinuation of treatment was similar in the two study groups. There were 64 deaths (1.7%) in the tiotropium group and 78 (2.1%) in the salmeterol group. These results show that, in patients with moderate-to-very-severe COPD, tiotropium is more effective than salmeterol in preventing exacerbations. (Funded by Boehringer Ingelheim and Pfizer; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00563381.).
                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
                02 February 2018
                : 13
                : 451-463
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Pulmonology, IIS–Fundación Jiménez Díaz, CIBERES, UAM
                [2 ]Pulmonology, Inpatient and Noninvasive Mechanical Ventilation, Hospital Universitario Infanta Sofía, Madrid
                [3 ]Alicante-Sant Joan Health District, Alicante/Universidad Miguel Hernández Elche/REDISEC
                [4 ]Family and Community Medicine, CSU Pozuelo Estación, School of Medicine, UAM
                [5 ]Department of Pulmonology, Hospital Ramón y Cajal, Madrid
                [6 ]Pulmonology Section, Hospital Universitario del Tajo, Aranjuez
                [7 ]Department of Pulmonology, Hospital Universitario 12 de Octubre
                [8 ]C.S. Torrelaguna
                [9 ]Pulmonology Section, Hospital del Sureste
                [10 ]FisioRespiración-Respiratory Physiotherapy Unit, Escuela Universitaria Gimbernat Cantabria
                [11 ]S. Pulmonology, CEP Hnos. Sangro HGU Gregorio Marañón, Madrid
                [12 ]Calitè Research Group, Universidad Miguel Hernández de Elche, Elche, Spain
                Author notes
                Correspondence: Felipe Villar-Álvarez, Department of Pulmonology, IIS–Fundación Jiménez Díaz, CIBERES, UAM, Av Reyes Católicos 2, Madrid 28049, Spain, Email fvillarleon@ 123456yahoo.es
                Article
                copd-13-451
                10.2147/COPD.S151939
                5799849
                © 2018 Villar-Álvarez 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.

                Categories
                Original Research

                Respiratory medicine

                quality assurance, copd, consensus, patient safety

                Comments

                Comment on this article