Active screening for COPD among hospitalized smokers - a feasibility study

Comparative analysis between PUMA and CAPTURE questionnaires for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) screening in smokers

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) presents a significant global challenge, impacting health systems, economies, and societies. Its prevalence is anticipated to rise owing to an aging demographic. Although the PUMA and CAPTURE questionnaires are available for COPD screening, their comparative effectiveness has not been studied in Indonesia. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of the PUMA and CAPTURE questionnaires as screening tools for COPD among smokers. A cross-sectional study was conducted at Universitas Sumatera Utara Hospital and H. Adam Malik General Hospital, Medan, Indonesia, from December 2022 to February 2023. Smokers aged over 40 or above with a history of smoking more than 100 cigarettes in their lifetime and no previous COPD diagnosis were included in the study. To collect the responses to PUMA and CAPTURE questionnaire, face-to-face interviews were conducted, followed by a spirometry test. A total of 76 smokers were included in the study; the predominant age group was 51-60 years (36.8%), with the majority being male (81.6%). Most participants began smoking at ages 15-20 years (65.8%) and had been smoking for 20-30 years (36.8%) at a moderate intensity (44.8%). Spirometry tests indicated obstructive patterns in 50 participants, with 17 classified as severe obstruction. At a cut-off score of ≥6, the PUMA questionnaire yielded a sensitivity of 72.55% and a specificity of 84%. In contrast, the CAPTURE questionnaire, with a cut-off score of ≥4, exhibited a sensitivity of 70.83% and a specificity of 64.29%. These results imply that the PUMA questionnaire could be more efficient in COPD screening compared to the CAPTURE questionnaire.

How to Enhance the Diagnosis of Early Stages of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD)? The Role of Mobile Spirometry in COPD Screening and Diagnosis-A Systematic Review

COPD is the third leading cause of death worldwide. Its diagnosis can be made with spirometry, which is underused due to its limited accessibility. Portable spirometry holds promise for enhancing the efficacy of COPD diagnoses. The study aimed to estimate COPD prevalence diagnosed with a portable spirometer in high-risk patients and compare it with COPD prevalence based on data from conventional, on-site spirometry. We also evaluated the strategy of a proactive approach to identify COPD in high-risk individuals. We conducted a systematic review of original studies on COPD targeted screening and diagnosis with portable and conventional spirometers selected from 8496 publications initially found in three databases: Cochrane, PubMed, and Embase. The inclusion criteria were met by 28 studies. COPD prevalence evaluated with the use of portable spirometers reached 20.27% and was lower compared to that estimated with the use of conventional spirometers (24.67%). In 11 included studies, postbronchodilator tests were performed with portable spirometers, which enabled a bedside COPD diagnosis. Portable spirometers can be successfully used in COPD targeted screening and diagnosis and thus enhance the detection of COPD at early stages.

Implementation of a screening and management pathway for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in patients with atrial fibrillation

AIMS

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) negatively impacts the efficacy of heart rhythm control treatments in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Although COPD is recognized as a risk factor for AF, practical guidance about how and when to screen for COPD is not available. Herein, we describe the implementation of an integrated screening and management pathway for COPD into the existing pre-ablation work-up in an AF outpatient clinic infrastructure.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Consecutive unselected patients accepted for AF catheter ablation in the Maastricht University Medical Center+ were prospectively screened for airflow limitation using handheld (micro)spirometry at the pre-ablation outpatient clinic supervised by an AF nurse. Patients with results suggestive of airflow limitation were offered referral to the pulmonologist. Handheld (micro)spirometry was performed in 232 AF patients, which provided interpretable results in 206 (88.8%) patients. Airflow limitation was observed in 47 patients (20.3%). Out of these 47 patients, 29 (62%) opted for referral to the pulmonologist. The primary reason for non-referral was low perceived symptom burden. Using this screening strategy 17 (out of 232; 7.3%) ultimately received a diagnosis of chronic respiratory disease, either COPD or asthma.

CONCLUSION

A COPD care pathway can successfully be embedded in an existing AF outpatient clinic infrastructure, using (micro)spirometry and remote analysis of results. Although one out of five patients had results suggestive of an underlying chronic respiratory disease, only 62% of these patients opted for a referral. Pre-selection of patients as well as patient education might increase the diagnostic yield and requires further research.

The use of a mobile spirometry with a feedback quality assessment in primary care setting - A nationwide cross-sectional feasibility study

OBJECTIVES

Mobile phone-linked portable spirometers are light-weight, easy to use and low cost, with new software to facilitate data collection. In this study we investigated the feasibility of the AioCare® mobile spirometry in primary care.

METHODS

In this nationwide, cross-sectional study, AioCare® spirometers (HealthUp, Poland) were distributed among primary healthcare centres across Poland. Operators (primary care professionals) received a 2-h training session, after which spirometry was performed in patients attending routine visits with respiratory symptoms or risk factors for obstructive airway diseases. Spirometry was considered technically correct when at least three manoeuvres met ERS/ATS acceptability and repeatability criteria. The most common spirometry errors were assessed and stepwise logistic regression was applied to identify factors associated with technically correct spirometry. Airway obstruction was defined as FEV₁/FVC below the lower limit of normal. A restrictive pattern was defined as FVC below the lower limit of normal.

RESULTS

Between 1 September 2018 and 1 September 2019, 10,936 spirometry examinations were performed in 9855 patients by 673 operators. 5347 (49%) spirometry examinations met both acceptability and repeatability criteria. The most common error was plateau error (17.7%). Operator age >40 years (OR 1.49, 95% CI 1.35-1.64) and repetition of the examination at the same visit (OR 1.90, 95% CI 1.66-2.16) increased the likelihood of a technically correct examination. Airway obstruction was found in 17% of correctly performed spirometry examinations.

CONCLUSIONS

Our nationwide study suggests that use of the AioCare® mobile spirometer in primary care could be feasible. More intensive and continual training should be implemented to improve the quality of spirometry examinations.