Management of Chronic Cough in Adult Primary Care: A Qualitative Study

Chronic cough diagnosis, treatment, and referral practices among family physicians in the United States: a survey study

BACKGROUND

Cough is one of the most common presenting problems for patients in primary care and is largely managed in primary care clinical settings. Family physicians' familiarity with chronic cough guidelines and the extent to which these guidelines translate into everyday practice have not been well described. The objective of this study was to characterize current diagnosis, treatment, and referral practices among family physicians and to identify potentially impactful strategies to optimize chronic cough management in primary care.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional survey of 5,000 family physicians to explore diagnosis, treatment, and referral practices related to chronic cough management in adults in primary care. Respondents completed the survey via paper or online. The outcome measures were self-reported numeric ratings and responses related to the survey elements.

RESULTS

588 surveys were completed (11.8% response rate). About half (49.6%) of respondents defined chronic cough in a manner consistent with the American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP) chronic cough guidelines, with the rest differing in opinion primarily regarding duration of symptom presentation. Respondents reported trying to rule out most common causes of chronic cough themselves before referring (mean 3.41 on a 4-point scale where 4 is "describes me completely") and indicated a desire for more resources to help them manage and treat chronic cough. Years in practice and rural/urban setting influenced diagnosis and referral practices.

CONCLUSIONS

Family physicians see chronic cough as a complicated condition that can be and is often diagnosed and treated entirely in a primary care setting. They also value the ability to refer in complex cases. Our results support that family physicians provide evidence-based management of chronic cough.

Chronic Cough: Characterizing and Quantifying Burden in Adults Using a Nationwide Electronic Health Records Database

Chronic cough is a common condition; until recently, no International Classification of Diseases (ICD) code for chronic cough existed; therefore, the true scope and burden of chronic cough is unclear. Using established algorithms, we examined chronic cough patients and their risk profiles, recurrent cough episodes, and subsequent 1-year health care utilization in the nationwide Cerner EHR data resource, compared with those with acute cough. An ICD-based algorithm was applied to the Cerner Health Facts EHR database to derive a phenotype of chronic cough defined as three ICD-based "cough" encounters 14-days apart over a 56-to-120-day period from 2015 to 2017. Demographics, comorbidities, and outcomes (1-year outpatient, emergency, and inpatient encounters) were collected for the chronic cough cohort and acute cough cohort. The chronic cough cohort was 61.5% female, 70.4% white, and 15.2% African American, with 13.7% being of Asian, Native American, or unknown race. Compared with the acute cough cohort, chronic cough patients were more likely to be older, female, and have chronic pulmonary disease, obesity, and depression. Predictors of recurrent chronic cough were older age and race. Those with chronic cough had more outpatient (2.48 ± 2.10 vs. 1.48 ± 0.99; SMD = 0.94), emergency (1.90 ± 2.26 vs. 1.23 ± 0.68; SMD = 0.82), and inpatient (1.11 ± 0.36 vs. 1.05 ± 0.24, SMD = 0.24) encounters compared with acute cough. While EHR-based data may provide a useful resource to identify chronic cough phenotypes, supplementary data approaches and screening methods for chronic cough can further identify the scope of the problem.

Systematic literature review of treatments used for refractory or unexplained chronic cough in adults

BACKGROUND

Refractory or unexplained chronic cough (RCC or UCC) is difficult to manage and is usually treated by the off-label use of drugs approved for other indications.

OBJECTIVE

The objectives of this systematic literature review (SLR) were to identify and characterize the current published body of evidence for the efficacy and safety of treatments for RCC or UCC.

METHODS

The SLR was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The SLRs pre-defined population included patients ≥18 years of age who were diagnosed with chronic cough. The review was not restricted to any intervention type or study comparator, nor by timeframe.

RESULTS

A total of 20 eligible publications from 19 unique trials were included. Seventeen of these trials were randomized controlled trials and most (14/17) were placebo-controlled. There was considerable variability between trials in the definition of RCC or UCC, participant exclusion and inclusion criteria, outcome measurement timepoints, and the safety and efficacy outcomes assessed. Several trials identified significant improvements in cough frequency, severity, or health-related quality of life measures while participants were on treatment, although these improvements did not persist in any of the studies that included a post-treatment follow-up timepoint.

CONCLUSIONS

In the absence of an approved therapy, placebo remains the most common comparator in trials of potential RCC or UCC treatments. The between-study comparability of the published evidence is limited by heterogeneity of study design, study populations, and outcomes measures, as well as by concerns regarding study size and risk of bias.

Interdisciplinary collaboration in the diagnosis and management of chronic cough: the role and importance of primary care providers

Chronic cough (CC) is associated with many conditions, so identifying contributing causes poses a diagnostic challenge. However, guidelines written for US physicians do not explicitly outline suggested roles for primary care providers (PCPs) in the approach to patients with CC, including refractory or unexplained CC. The objective of this review is to describe the role of PCPs in the diagnosis and treatment of CC in adults. This narrative review draws upon literature (identified via a PubMed search performed January 9, 2023, using primary care/disease state-related terms) and expertise from specialist physicians to provide recommendations for CC management in primary care. Cough is one of the top reasons patients seek care from PCPs; accordingly, PCPs are often the first physicians to conduct workup and initiate treatment. Patients with CC often experience a burdensome cough that lasts for years, have high healthcare resource utilization (HCRU), undergo multiple or failed treatment trials, and have limited success finding an etiology. Although specialist referral may be needed for many diagnostic tests, initial aspects of CC workup and management should be completed in primary care. Often more accessible than specialists, real-world evidence on HCRU suggests PCPs are important stakeholders in diagnosing and managing CC, including during initial workup and treatment for the most common causes of CC (i.e. upper-airway cough syndrome, asthma, noneosinophilic asthmatic bronchitis, and gastroesophageal reflux disease). Thorough workup at the primary care level may facilitate earlier identification of CC cause(s), improving patient journey to diagnosis and management.

The "vicious circle" of chronic cough: the patient experience - qualitative synthesis

Aim

The aim of this study was to systematically search and synthesise findings from peer-reviewed qualitative studies describing the experiences of those living with chronic cough.

Methods

A systematic search was conducted to identify all studies that used qualitative methodology to report on the experiences of adults living with chronic cough. A thematic synthesis of the first-hand narratives was undertaken. Key themes in relation to personal perspectives and experiences of living with chronic cough were identified and grouped into analytical themes.

Results

Six studies met the inclusion criteria. The thematic synthesis generated three analytical themes: 1) "It's just a cough"; 2) "Constant cough and constant worry"; and 3) "No light at the end of the tunnel", highlighting the biopsychosocial nature of chronic cough. The synthesis highlights chronic cough as a heterogeneous experience that may appear idiosyncratic, completely consuming the lives of those living with it.

Conclusion

This is to our knowledge the first qualitative synthesis reporting on the perceptions and experiences of adults living with chronic cough. Our review draws attention to the paucity of literature that utilises qualitative methodology to explore the experience of living with chronic cough. We highlight the missing voice of people living with chronic cough in the contemporary literature. There is now a requirement for research exploring the narratives of those living with chronic cough, to gain an understanding of the condition beyond simple quantification.

Canadian Health Care Professionals' Familiarity with Chronic Cough Guidelines and Experiences with Diagnosis and Management: A Cross-Sectional Survey

INTRODUCTION

Educational programs on chronic cough may improve patient care, but little is known about how Canadian physicians manage this common debilitating condition. We aimed to investigate Canadian physicians' perceptions, attitudes, and knowledge of chronic cough.

METHODS

We administered a 10-min anonymous, online, cross-sectional survey to 3321 Canadian physicians in the Leger Opinion Panel who managed adult patients with chronic cough and had been in practice for > 2 years.

RESULTS

Between July 30 and September 22, 2021, 179 physicians (101 general practitioners [GPs] and 78 specialists [25 allergists, 28 respirologists, and 25 ear/nose/throat specialists]) completed the survey (response rate: 5.4%). In a month, GPs saw a mean of 27 patients with chronic cough, whereas specialists saw 46. About one-third of physicians appropriately identified a duration of > 8 weeks as the definition for chronic cough. Many physicians reported not using international chronic cough management guidelines. Patient referrals and care pathways varied considerably, and patients frequently experienced lost to follow-up. While physicians endorsed nasal and inhaled corticosteroids as common treatments for chronic cough, they rarely used other guideline-recommended treatments. Both GPs and specialists expressed high interest in education on chronic cough.

CONCLUSION

This survey of Canadian physicians demonstrates low uptake of recent advances in chronic cough diagnosis, disease categorization, and pharmacologic management. Canadian physicians also report unfamiliarity with guideline-recommended therapies, including centrally acting neuromodulators for refractory or unexplained chronic cough. This data highlights the need for educational programs and collaborative care models on chronic cough in primary and specialist care.

Management and referral patterns for new-onset chronic cough in primary care patients

Background: The diagnosis and management of chronic cough in primary care is challenging despite it being one of the most common chronic conditions. Objective: Clinical characterization of patients with new-onset chronic cough in the primary care setting. Methods: This was a retrospective study of adult patients (ages ≥ 18 years) with at least three visits with primary care providers (PCP) for new-onset cough, with at least 8 weeks between the first and third visits, within a tertiary-care center and affiliated clinics between January 1, 2010, and January 1, 2019 (N = 174). We calculated the frequency of primary care visits, diagnostic testing, specialist referrals, and prescribed medications up to 18 months after the third visit with a PCP for cough. Results: Of 174 patients who met the criteria of new-onset chronic cough, >50% had four or more primary care visits related to cough. Despite that, 91 (52.3%) did not receive a referral to a specialist, and 41 (23.5%) did not receive an order for a chest radiograph during the evaluation of the chronic cough. Antibiotics and systemic corticosteroids were prescribed to 106 (61%) and 63 (36%) of the patients, respectively, and 20% were prescribed opiates. No patients were prescribed central-neuromodulating agents, and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors were discontinued in 48% of the patients who were taking them (12/25). Conclusion: We found considerable heterogeneity and discrepancies with clinical guideline recommendations in patients who presented with new chronic cough. There is a substantial unmet need to study chronic cough in the primary care setting to inform important stakeholders.