首页> 外文期刊>International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease >Comparison of disease-severity measures within severe and very severe COPD patients: results from a nationally representative chart review and patient survey
【24h】

Comparison of disease-severity measures within severe and very severe COPD patients: results from a nationally representative chart review and patient survey

机译:在重度和极重度COPD患者中疾病严重性指标的比较:全国代表性图表审查和患者调查的结果

获取原文
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

Objective: This study aimed to compare spirometry- and risk + symptom-based classification systems to physician-based severity assessment and find which system is most predictive of patient-reported health status, as measured by the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire for COPD (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; SGRQ-C).Materials and methods: In this chart review/patient survey, 99 physicians recruited patients with physician-assessed severe or very severe COPD who had recently experienced a moderate or severe exacerbation. A cross-tabulation was undertaken comparing physician report, spirometry (mild/moderate, forced expiratory volume in 1 second [FEV1] ≥50%; severe, 30% ≤ FEV1 <50%; very severe, FEV1 <30% predicted), and risk + symptom-based (A, low risk/fewer symptoms; B, low risk/more symptoms; C, high risk/fewer symptoms; D, high risk/more symptoms) severity systems. Analysis of covariance models were run for SGRQ-C, varying COPD-severity systems.Results: Of 244 patients, 58.6% were severe and 34.8% very severe by physician report, 70% had FEV1 ≤50% at their most recent visit, and 86% fell into quadrant D. Spirometry and physician report had 57.4% agreement, with physicians often indicating higher severity. Physician report and risk + symptom agreement was high (81.2% severe/very severe and D). Physician-reported severity, risk + symptoms, exacerbations in the previous year, and symptoms were significant SGRQ-C predictors, while spirometry was not.Conclusion: For recently exacerbating severe or very severe COPD patients, risk + symptoms more closely aligned with physician-reported severity and SGRQ-C versus spirometry.
机译:目的:本研究旨在将基于肺活量测定和风险+症状的分类系统与基于医生的严重程度评估进行比较,并找出哪个系统最能预测患者报告的健康状况,这是根据针对慢性阻塞性肺病的慢性乔治问卷调查(慢性阻塞性材料和方法:在该图表审查/患者调查中,有99位医生招募了经过医生评估的严重或非常严重的COPD患者,这些患者最近经历了中度或重度加重。比较了医生的报告,肺活量检查(1秒内轻度/中度,强制呼气量[FEV1]≥50%;严重,30%≤FEV1 <50%;非常严重,FEV1 <30%预计),并进行了交叉比较基于风险+基于症状的严重性系统(A,低风险/较少症状; B,低风险/较少症状; C,高风险/较少症状; D,高风险/较多症状)。结果:在244例患者中,根据医生的报告,严重程度为58.6%,严重程度为34.8%,严重程度为重度;在最近的就诊中,FEV1≤50%的患者为244。 86%的患者进入D象限。肺活量测定法和医生的报告达成了57.4%的一致性,医生通常表明病情的严重程度更高。内科医生的报告和风险+症状的一致性很高(严重/非常严重和D为81.2%)。医师报告的严重程度,风险+症状,前一年的病情加重和症状是SGRQ-C的重要预测指标,而肺活量测定则无明显结论。报告的严重性和SGRQ-C与肺活量测定法的比较。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

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