首页> 外文期刊>Internal medicine journal >Comparison of Australian and international guidelines for grading severity of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.
【24h】

Comparison of Australian and international guidelines for grading severity of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

机译:比较澳大利亚和国际指南对慢性阻塞性肺疾病的严重程度进行分级。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Aim: To compare grading of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) using Australian guidelines Confirm diagnosis, Optimize function, Prevent deterioration, Develop a self-management plan and manage eXacerbations (COPD-X) versus Global initiative for Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) guidelines and to assess whether this is associated with differences in other health domains affected by COPD. Adult outpatients (n = 61) with COPD were studied using lung function measurements, six-minute walk test and body composition assessments. Subjects also completed self-rated dyspnoea scores and health-related quality-of-life scales. For each patient, COPD severity was graded using both COPD-X and GOLD guidelines, and results were collectively analysed. If significant discrepancies were observed, comparisons of other health domains were carried out. After grading severity using COPD-X and GOLD guidelines, significant discrepancies were noted. Of nine subjects with no disease (normal) based on COPD-X, seven were judged to be 'mild' according to GOLD. Similarly, 11 of 12 patients with mild disease (COPD-X) had 'moderate' disease judged by GOLD, and 9 of 23 with moderate severity (COPD-X) had 'severe' COPD using GOLD. Finally, 6 of 17 patients with COPD-X-rated severe disease had 'very severe' disease using the GOLD criteria. Among patients with COPD-X severe disease, those with GOLD discordant (very severe) severity had a poorer quality of life compared with those with GOLD concordant (severe) severity (P = 0.006). Similarly, there was also a trend towards lower six-minute walk test distance and greater subjective dyspnoea in GOLD very severe patients compared with GOLD severe patients. Significant discrepancies in grading of severity exist between Australian and international COPD guidelines. Current Australian guidelines for severity grading may not fully reflect the effect COPD has on other key domains of health.
机译:目的:使用澳大利亚指南比较慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)的等级确认诊断,优化功能,预防恶化,制定自我管理计划并管理恶化(COPD-X)与全球阻塞性肺疾病(GOLD)指南并评估这是否与受COPD影响的其他健康领域的差异有关。使用肺功能测量,六分钟步行测试和身体成分评估研究了COPD的成人门诊患者(n = 61)。受试者还完成了自我评估的呼吸困难评分和与健康相关的生活质量量表。对于每位患者,均使用COPD-X和GOLD指南对COPD严重程度进行分级,并对结果进行集体分析。如果发现显着差异,则进行其他健康领域的比较。使用COPD-X和GOLD指南对严重程度进行分级后,发现了明显的差异。根据GOLD,在9名没有患COPD-X疾病的受试者(正常)中,有7名被判定为“轻度”。同样,在12例轻度疾病(COPD-X)患者中,有11例通过GOLD判断为“中度”疾病,在23例中度严重度(COPD-X)患者中,使用GOLD判断为“严重” COPD。最后,按照GOLD标准,在COPD-X级严重疾病的17名患者中,有6名患有“非常严重”疾病。在患有COPD-X重症的患者中,与GOLD不和谐(严重)严重程度相比,GOLD不和谐(非常严重)严重程度的患者的生活质量较差(P = 0.006)。同样,与GOLD严重患者相比,GOLD严重患者的六分钟步行测试距离和主观呼吸困难也有趋势。在澳大利亚和国际COPD指南之间,严重程度分级存在显着差异。澳大利亚现行的严重度分级指南可能无法完全反映出COPD对其他关键健康领域的影响。

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