首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>NPJ Primary Care Respiratory Medicine >COPD screening in primary care: who is sick?
【2h】

COPD screening in primary care: who is sick?

机译:初级保健中的COPD筛查:谁病了?

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Current COPD guidelines such as the GOLD workshop report use a fixed FEV1/FVC value (0.70) to define airway obstruction, and FEV1 % predicted to classify COPD severity. Evidence is emerging that this approach leads to an unacceptable percentage of false-positive diagnoses of mild and moderate COPD. Expressing FEV1 as a percent predicted value similarly introduces a bias: small people, elderly people, and especially small elderly people who are in good respiratory health will be incorrectly identified as having an abnormally low FEV1. More appropriate classification rules for defining the presence and severity of airway obstruction are urgently needed, especially for primary care doctors who have to deal with the early stages of COPD. The use of the lower limit of normal (LLN) for the FEV1/FVC ratio instead of a fixed ratio value of 0.70 would be a first rational step towards a better classification of airway obstruction.
机译:当前的COPD指南(例如GOLD研讨会报告)使用固定的FEV1 / FVC值(0.70)来定义气道阻塞,而预测的FEV1%可对COPD严重程度进行分类。越来越多的证据表明,这种方法会导致轻度和中度COPD的假阳性诊断百分比上升。将FEV1表示为预测值的百分比同样会产生偏差:年轻人,老年人,尤其是呼吸健康的老人尤其会被错误地识别为FEV1异常低。迫切需要更合适的分类规则来定义气道阻塞的存在和严重程度,特别是对于那些必须应对COPD早期阶段的初级保健医生而言。使用FEV1 / FVC比率的法线下限(LLN)代替固定比率值0.70将是朝更好地对气道阻塞进行分类的第一步。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号