[Perceptions of family doctors, pulmonologists and allergists on the approach to patients with chronic cough. Results of an anonymous survey]. / Percepciones de médicos de familia, neumólogos y alergólogos sobre el abordaje de los pacientes con tos crónica. Resultados de una encuesta anónima.

OBJECTIVE: To understand the perception of family doctors, pulmonologists and allergists about the current approach to chronic cough and its impact on patients' quality of life. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Cross-sectional and anonymous survey disseminated through the scientific societies SEAIC, SEMERGEN, semFYC, SEMG and SEPAR. The participants were 620 family doctors, 92 pulmonologists and 62 allergists. A descriptive analysis of the answers was conducted. Response percentages, medians and interquartile intervals were presented. The differences in the percentages between specialties were evaluated with the chi-square. RESULTS: Only half of the respondents chose a duration greater than 8 weeks as a criterion for diagnosing chronic cough, and less than half considered refractory/unexplained chronic cough a disease in itself. Family doctors perceived that chronic cough had less impact on patients than did pulmonologists or allergists. After a diagnosis of refractory/unexplained chronic cough, all 3specialties considered the most common approach to be to initiate treatment and to do the follow-up of the patient themselves. Most stated that they had no protocols for managing chronic cough, and more than 90% considered these to be necessary. CONCLUSIONS: The management of patients with chronic cough by family doctors, pulmonologists or allergists seems to be heterogeneous. There is a need for protocols that standardise diagnosis, referral and treatment criteria to optimise patients' management and reduce the impact of chronic cough.

Compliance with the clinical guidelines for managing asthma by primary care physicians: An ambispective observational study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the degree of compliance with the recommendations of the 2009 and 2015 versions of the Spanish guidelines for managing asthma (Guía Española para el Manejo del Asma [GEMA]) and the effect of this compliance on controlling the disease. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We conducted an observational ambispective study between September 2015 and April 2016 in which 314 primary care physicians and 2864 patients participated. RESULTS: Using retrospective data, we found that 81 of the 314 physicians (25.8%; 95% CI 21.3-30.9) stated that they complied with the GEMA2009 recommendations. At the start of the study, 88 of the 314 physicians (28.0%; 95% CI 23.4-33.2) complied with the GEMA2015 recommendations. Poorly controlled asthma (OR, 0.19; 95% CI 0.13-0.28) and persistent severe asthma at the start of the study (OR, 0.20; 95% CI 0.12-0.34) were negatively associated with having well-controlled asthma by the end of the follow-up. In contrast, compliance with the GEMA2015 recommendations was positively associated with a greater likelihood that the patient would have well-controlled asthma by the end of the follow-up (OR, 1.70; 95% CI 1.40-2.06). CONCLUSIONS: Low compliance with the clinical guidelines for managing asthma is a common problem among primary care physicians. Compliance with these guidelines is associated with a better asthma control. Actions need to be taken to improve primary care physician compliance with the asthma management guidelines.

Seguimiento de las guías españolas para el manejo del asma por el médico de atención primaria: un estudio observacional ambispectivo / Compliance with the clinical guidelines for managing asthma by primary care physicians: An ambispective observational study

Objetivo Evaluar el grado de seguimiento de las recomendaciones de las versiones de la Guía española para el manejo del asma (GEMA 2009 y 2015) y su repercusión en el control de la enfermedad. Material y métodos Estudio observacional y ambispectivo realizado entre septiembre del 2015 y abril del 2016, en el que participaron 314 médicos de atención primaria y 2.864 pacientes. Resultados Utilizando datos retrospectivos, 81 de los 314 médicos (25,8% [IC del 95%, 21,3 a 30,9]) comunicaron seguir las recomendaciones de la GEMA 2009. Al inicio del estudio, 88 de los 314 médicos (28,0% [IC del 95%, 23,4 a 33,2]) seguían las recomendaciones de la GEMA 2015. El tener un asma mal controlada (OR 0,19, IC del 95%, 0,13 a 0,28) y presentar un asma persistente grave al inicio del estudio (OR 0,20, IC del 95%, 0,12 a 0,34) se asociaron negativamente con tener un asma bien controlada al final del seguimiento. Por el contrario, el seguimiento de las recomendaciones de la GEMA 2015 se asoció de manera positiva con una mayor posibilidad de que el paciente tuviera un asma bien controlada al final del periodo de seguimiento (OR 1,70, IC del 95%, 1,40 a 2,06). Conclusiones El escaso seguimiento de las guías clínicas para el manejo del asma constituye un problema común entre los médicos de atención primaria. Un seguimiento de estas guías se asocia con un control mejor del asma. Existe la necesidad de actuaciones que puedan mejorar el seguimiento por parte de los médicos de atención primaria de las guías para el manejo del asma (AU)

Objective To assess the degree of compliance with the recommendations of the 2009 and 2015 versions of the Spanish guidelines for managing asthma (Guía Española para el Manejo del Asma [GEMA]) and the effect of this compliance on controlling the disease. Material and methods We conducted an observational ambispective study between September 2015 and April 2016 in which 314 primary care physicians and 2864 patients participated. Results Using retrospective data, we found that 81 of the 314 physicians (25.8%; 95% CI 21.3–30.9) stated that they complied with the GEMA2009 recommendations. At the start of the study, 88 of the 314 physicians (28.0%; 95% CI 23.4–33.2) complied with the GEMA2015 recommendations. Poorly controlled asthma (OR, 0.19; 95% CI 0.13–0.28) and persistent severe asthma at the start of the study (OR, 0.20; 95% CI 0.12–0.34) were negatively associated with having well-controlled asthma by the end of the follow-up. In contrast, compliance with the GEMA2015 recommendations was positively associated with a greater likelihood that the patient would have well-controlled asthma by the end of the follow-up (OR, 1.70; 95% CI 1.40–2.06). Conclusions Low compliance with the clinical guidelines for managing asthma is a common problem among primary care physicians. Compliance with these guidelines is associated with better asthma control. Actions need to be taken to improve primary care physician compliance with the asthma management guidelines (AU)

Assessment of physical functioning in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) requiring long-acting dual bronchodilation in routine clinical practice.

OBJECTIVE: We aim to determine the effect of a fixed-dose combination (FDC) of tiotropium/olodaterol on Physical activity (PA) in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in a real world setting. METHODS: COPD patients were prospectively enrolled to evaluate the effect of a FDC of tiotropium/olodaterol inhaler therapy via the Respimat® Soft Mist™ inhaler (SMI) on the physical functioning scale (PF-10), and the general condition of the patient as assessed by the physician (Physician's Global Evaluation, PGE), and the patient's satisfaction after 6 weeks of treatment. The primary end-point was the percentage of patients with therapeutic success at 6th week follow-up, defined as a ≥10-points increase in the standardised PF-10 score from baseline. RESULTS: A total of 257 patients from 57 sites were enrolled, and 234 completed the follow up. After 6 weeks of treatment, 155 out of 234 patients (66.2%) showed therapeutic success in the physical functioning score, coupled with significant improvement in PGE score: 78 (33.3%) patients with good/excellent PGE score at baseline, increasing to 172 (73.5%) at 6th week (p<0.0001). The patient's satisfaction was excellent: 77.2% reporting to be satisfied/very satisfied with the treatment, 79.9% with inhaling and 79.0% with the handling of SMI device. 1.6% of patients reported an investigator-defined drug-related adverse event. CONCLUSION: Treatment of COPD patients with a FDC of tiotropium/olodaterol SMI for 6 weeks resulted in significant improvements in the patients' condition as assessed by patients and physicians, with no new safety findings.

El manejo del asma como enfermedad inflamatoria crónica y problema sanitario global: documento de posicionamiento de las sociedades científicas / The management of asthma as a chronic inflammatory disease and global health problem: a position paper from the scientific societies

El asma es la enfermedad respiratoria más prevalente en el mundo; puede afectar a personas de todas las edades y es potencialmente mortal. En la actualidad, contamos con tratamientos de mantenimiento que son efectivos en la mayoría de los pacientes con asma y, sin embargo, una proporción importante no tiene bien controlada su enfermedad a pesar de los medios disponibles. En este documento, con el respaldo de las sociedades de los médicos que tratan el asma en España, se quiere llamar la atención de la sociedad y los profesionales sobre este problema en nuestro país. Se pone el foco sobre los aspectos clínicos, diagnósticos y terapéuticos del asma y se plantean algunas acciones de mejora en el ámbito de los pacientes y en el profesional sanitario que, en vista de los resultados actuales derivados de la falta de control del asma, podrían ser beneficiosas tanto en los resultados clínicos para los pacientes como en los de salud pública

Asthma is the most prevalent respiratory disease worldwide and it can affect people of all ages and is potentially fatal. Today, maintenance treatments are available that are effective in most patients, yet a significant proportion have poorly controlled disease, despite the resources on offer. This document, endorsed by members of the Spanish medical societies involved in the treatment of asthma, is intended to draw the attention of society and professionals to this problem in Spain. It focuses on the clinical, diagnostic and therapeutic aspects of asthma, and proposes some actions for improvement as regards patients and healthcare professionals which, in view of the current results arising from inadequate asthma control, might be beneficial to improve outcomes for both patients and public health

[The management of asthma as a chronic inflammatory disease and global health problem: A position paper from the scientific societies]. / El manejo del asma como enfermedad inflamatoria crónica y problema sanitario global: documento de posicionamiento de las sociedades científicas.

Asthma is the most prevalent respiratory disease worldwide and it can affect people of all ages and is potentially fatal. Today, maintenance treatments are available that are effective in most patients, yet a significant proportion have poorly controlled disease, despite the resources on offer. This document, endorsed by members of the Spanish medical societies involved in the treatment of asthma, is intended to draw the attention of society and professionals to this problem in Spain. It focuses on the clinical, diagnostic and therapeutic aspects of asthma, and proposes some actions for improvement as regards patients and healthcare professionals which, in view of the current results arising from inadequate asthma control, might be beneficial to improve outcomes for both patients and public health.

Compliance with the clinical guidelines for managing asthma by primary care physicians: An ambispective observational study. / Seguimiento de las guías españolas para el manejo del asma por el médico de atención primaria: un estudio observacional ambispectivo.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the degree of compliance with the recommendations of the 2009 and 2015 versions of the Spanish guidelines for managing asthma (Guía Española para el Manejo del Asma [GEMA]) and the effect of this compliance on controlling the disease. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We conducted an observational ambispective study between September 2015 and April 2016 in which 314 primary care physicians and 2864 patients participated. RESULTS: Using retrospective data, we found that 81 of the 314 physicians (25.8%; 95% CI 21.3-30.9) stated that they complied with the GEMA2009 recommendations. At the start of the study, 88 of the 314 physicians (28.0%; 95% CI 23.4-33.2) complied with the GEMA2015 recommendations. Poorly controlled asthma (OR, 0.19; 95% CI 0.13-0.28) and persistent severe asthma at the start of the study (OR, 0.20; 95% CI 0.12-0.34) were negatively associated with having well-controlled asthma by the end of the follow-up. In contrast, compliance with the GEMA2015 recommendations was positively associated with a greater likelihood that the patient would have well-controlled asthma by the end of the follow-up (OR, 1.70; 95% CI 1.40-2.06). CONCLUSIONS: Low compliance with the clinical guidelines for managing asthma is a common problem among primary care physicians. Compliance with these guidelines is associated with better asthma control. Actions need to be taken to improve primary care physician compliance with the asthma management guidelines.

Referral Criteria for Asthma: Consensus Document.

Asthma is one of the most prevalent chronic diseases in Spain. Current treatments ensure that the disease is controlled in most cases. However, disease is often uncontrolled in daily clinical practice, mainly owing to underdiagnosis, loss to follow-up, and poor adherence to therapy. In order to improve this situation, we must coordinate all those health professionals who intervene in patient care. Therefore, the Spanish Society of Allergology and Clinical Immunology (SEAIC), the Spanish Society of Primary Care Physicians (SEMERGEN), the Spanish Society of Family and Community Medicine (semFYC), the Spanish Society of General and Family Physicians (SEMG), and the Spanish Society of Pneumology and Thoracic Surgery (SEPAR) have drawn up a consensus document in which they establish criteria for referral and guidelines for the diagnosis, control, and follow-up of patients with asthma. The document aims to facilitate continuing and improved care in this area.

[Cost and management of asthma attacks treated in primary care (COAX Study)]. / Coste y manejo de las crisis asmáticas atendidas en atención primaria (estudio COAX).

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the cost and characterize the management of asthma attacks in primary care. DESIGN: Prospective, observational study of 1 year's duration. Setting. 10 physician's offices at 9 primary care centers located in 5 provinces (Asturias, Barcelona, Cadiz, Madrid, and Valencia) of Spain. PARTICIPANTS: 10 family physicians who saw 133 consecutive patients with an asthma attack. METHOD: Prospective, observational study; no intervention was used. Direct and indirect costs arising from asthma attacks were calculated. Episodes were treated according to the physicians' habitually used procedures; the study protocol did not specify any predetermined intervention. RESULTS: The attacks were classified as mild in 43.6% of the cases, moderately severe in 43.6%, and severe in 12.8%. Of all severe attacks, 17.2% occurred in patients with intermittent asthma. The more severe the attack, the less preventive treatment patients had received previously. The mean cost of asthma attacks was 166.7 (95% CI, 146.5-192.3); 80% (132.4) (95% CI, 122.7-143.8) were direct costs and 20% (34.3) (95% CI, 17-56.2) were indirect costs. The most economical management option was to change treatment, perform diagnostic tests and have the patient attend 2 follow-up appointments with the physician. CONCLUSIONS: Mean cost of each asthma attack treated in primary care was 166.7 (95% CI, 146.5-192.3), of which 80% were direct costs and 20% indirect costs.

[Effectiveness of a recuperative primary care intervention in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease]. / Efectividad de una intervención rehabilitadora, realizada en atención primaria, en la evolución de los pacientes con EPOC.

OBJECTIVES: The main objective is to assess the effect of a respiratory rehabilitation programme on the quality of life of patients with COPD. Secondary aims are to determine whether the intervention, as against the habitual monitoring, improves tolerance to exercise and pulmonary function, and reduces dyspnoea, the number of crises and hospital admissions due to COPD and the medication used to control the disease. DESIGN: Pragmatic cluster-randomised clinical trial. SETTING: Clinics of 16 PC teams in various health areas of the Community of Madrid. PARTICIPANTS: 476 patients with light-moderate COPD, who sign their informed consent. VARIABLES: Quality of life, number of crises, packages of medicines used to control the disease, unscheduled attendance, pulmonary function, dyspnoea and tolerance to exercise. METHOD: The consultations will be assigned to the control and intervention groups at random. At each clinic there will be a randomised selection from all patients with COPD and in a stable clinical condition. 238 patients are needed in each group, in order to detect a minimum difference of 4 points in quality of life, assuming a standard deviation of 16, 95% confidence level, 80% power and 20% losses. The effect between each factor and the variables evaluated through multivariate analysis will be calculated. DISCUSSION: This research project aims to show that a basic recuperative intervention, which is feasible and primary care-based, can achieve improvements in the quality of life of patients with COPD.

Coste y manejo de las crisis asmáticas atendidas en atención primaria (estudio COAX) / Cost and management of asthma attacks treated in primary care (COAX study)

Objetivos. Estimar el coste y conocer el manejo de una crisis asmática en atención primaria. Diseño. Estudio observacional, prospectivo. Emplazamiento. Diez consultas de 9 centros de atención primaria de 5 provincias (Asturias, Barcelona, Cádiz, Madrid y Valencia). Participantes. Diez médicos de familia que incluyeron, secuencialmente, a 133 pacientes con una crisis de asma. Mediciones principales. Se calcularon los costes directos e indirectos que supone una crisis de asma. El episodio se trató como habitualmente venía haciéndolo cada médico, sin que la intervención estuviera previamente definida en el protocolo del estudio. Resultados. Se observaron un 43,6% de crisis leves, un 43,6% de crisis moderadas y un 12,8% de crisis graves. El 17,2% de estas últimas ocurrieron en pacientes con asma intermitente. Cuanto más grave era la crisis, menor era el tratamiento preventivo anterior a ella. El coste medio de una crisis asmática fue de 166,7 € (intervalo de confianza [IC] del 95%, 146,5-192,3), el 80% (132,4 €; IC del 95%, 122,7-143,8) debido a costes directos y el 20% (34,3 €, (IC del 95%, 17-56,2) a costes indirectos. La opción más económica de manejo de una crisis fue «cambiar el tratamiento, realizar una prueba diagnóstica y 2 visitas médicas». Conclusiones. El coste medio de una crisis asmática tratada en atención primaria fue de 166,7 € (IC del 95%, 146,5-192,3), el 80% debido a costes directos y el 20% a costes indirectos

Objectives. To estimate the cost and characterize the management of asthma attacks in primary care. Design. Prospective, observational study of 1 year's duration. Setting. 10 physician's offices at 9 primary care centers located in 5 provinces (Asturias, Barcelona, Cadiz, Madrid, and Valencia) of Spain. Participants. 10 family physicians who saw 133 consecutive patients with an asthma attack. Method. Prospective, observational study; no intervention was used. Direct and indirect costs arising from asthma attacks were calculated. Episodes were treated according to the physicians' habitually used procedures; the study protocol did not specify any predetermined intervention. Results. The attacks were classified as mild in 43.6% of the cases, moderately severe in 43.6%, and severe in 12.8%. Of all severe attacks, 17.2% occurred in patients with intermittent asthma. The more severe the attack, the less preventive treatment patients had received previously. The mean cost of asthma attacks was €166.7 (95% CI, 146.5-192.3); 80% (€132.4) (95% CI, 122.7-143.8) were direct costs and 20% (€34.3) (95% CI, 17-56.2) were indirect costs. The most economical management option was to change treatment, perform diagnostic tests and have the patient attend 2 follow-up appointments with the physician. Conclusions. Mean cost of each asthma attack treated in primary care was €166.7 (95% CI, 146.5-192.3), of which 80% were direct costs and 20% indirect costs

Efectividad de una intervención rehabilitadora, realizada en atención primaria, en la evolución / How much a recuperative primary care intervention affects the evolution of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Objetivos. El objetivo principal es valorar la efectividad de un programa de rehabilitación respiratoria en la calidad de vida de pacientes con enfermedad pulmonar obstructiva crónica (EPOC). Los objetivos secundarios son: determinar si la intervención mejora la tolerancia al ejercicio y la función pulmonar, y disminuye la sensación de disnea, el número de exacerbaciones, los ingresos hospitalarios por EPOC y el consumo de medicación necesario para el adecuado control de la enfermedad frente al seguimiento habitual. Diseño. Ensayo clínico aleatorizado por grupos pragmático. Emplazamiento. Consultas de 16 equipos de atención primaria, repartidos por diferentes áreas sanitarias de la Comunidad de Madrid. Participantes. Se incluirá en el estudio a 476 pacientes con EPOC leve-moderada, que firmarán el consentimiento informado. Variables. Calidad de vida, número de agudizaciones, envases de medicación utilizados para el control, visitas no programadas, función pulmonar, disnea y tolerancia al ejercicio. Método. Se realizará asignación aleatoria de las consultas a cada grupo, control e intervención. En cada consulta se realizará una selección aleatoria del total de pacientes con EPOC, en situación clínica estable. Se precisan 238 pacientes en cada grupo para detectar una diferencia mínima de 4 puntos en la calidad de vida, asumiendo una desviación estándar de 16, un nivel de confianza del 95%, una potencia del 80% y unas pérdidas del 20%. Se estimará el efecto entre el factor de estudio y las variables evaluadas mediante análisis multivariante. Discusión. Este proyecto de investigación pretende demostrar que una intervención rehabilitadora básica, factible e implementada en atención primaria permite alcanzar mejoras en la calidad de vida de los pacientes con EPOC

Objectives. The main objective is to assess the effect of a respiratory rehabilitation programme on the quality of life of patients with COPD. Secondary aims are to determine whether the intervention, as against the habitual monitoring, improves tolerance to exercise and pulmonary function, and reduces dyspnoea, the number of crises and hospital admissions due to COPD and the medication used to control the disease. Design. Pragmatic cluster-randomised clinical trial. Setting. Clinics of 16 PC teams in various health areas of the Community of Madrid. Participants. 476 patients with light-moderate COPD, who sign their informed consent. Variables. Quality of life, number of crises, packages of medicines used to control the disease, unscheduled attendance, pulmonary function, dyspnoea and tolerance to exercise. Method. The consultations will be assigned to the control and intervention groups at random. At each clinic there will be a randomised selection from all patients with COPD and in a stable clinical condition. 238 patients are needed in each group, in order to detect a minimum difference of 4 points in quality of life, assuming a standard deviation of 16, 95% confidence level, 80% power and 20% losses. The effect between each factor and the variables evaluated through multivariate analysis will be calculated. Discussion. This research project aims to show that a basic recuperative intervention, which is feasible and primary care-based, can achieve improvements in the quality of life of patients with COPD

[Factors affecting drug prescription in patients with stable COPD: results from a multicenter Spanish study (IDENTEPOC)]. / Factores determinantes de la prescripción farmacológica en los pacientes con EPOC estable. Resultados de un estudio multicéntrico español (IDENTEPOC).

OBJECTIVE: To determine what factors are associated with prescription of drugs to patients with stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). MATERIAL AND METHODS: We studied 568 patients with stable COPD. Assessments included determination of the severity of dyspnea, body mass index, health-related quality of life, and spirometry testing. RESULTS: The forced expiratory volume in 1 second was significantly associated with prescription of long-acting beta2-adrenergic agonists (odds ratio [OR]=0.98; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.96-1) and inhaled corticosteroids (OR=0.98; 95% CI, 0.96-1). Quality of life was related to administration of short-acting beta2-adrenergic agonists (OR=1.02; 95% CI, 1-1.03), long-acting beta2-adrenergic agonists (OR=1.02; 95% CI, 1-1.03), ipratropium bromide (OR=1.03; 95% CI, 1-1.04), theophylline drugs (OR=1.02; 95% CI, 1-1.03), and inhaled corticosteroids (OR=1.02; 95% CI, 1-1.03). The severity of dyspnea was significantly associated with prescription of oral corticosteroids (for grade IV dyspnea, OR=15.25; 95% CI, 2.40-97.02). Body mass index was not related to drug administration. CONCLUSIONS: Drug prescription in patients with stable COPD correlates not only with forced expiratory volume in 1 second but also with other parameters such as health-related quality of life and dyspnea.

[Quality of life with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: the influence of level of patient care]. / Calidad de vida en la enfermedad pulmonar obstructiva crónica. Influencia del nivel de asistencia de los pacientes.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to determine the factors related to the health-related quality of life (HRQL) of patients with stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and to assess the degree of influence of level of patient care (primary or specialized). MATERIAL AND METHOD: An observational descriptive, cross-sectional, multicenter study was carried out. The study sample was a randomized selection taken from a stratified sample of patients treated by primary care physicians and pneumologists from each Spanish region. Only those patients whose level of health care was indicated and whose diagnosis of COPD was confirmed by spirometry were enrolled in the study. RESULTS: Five hundred sixty patients were assessed, 100 from primary health care and 460 from pneumology practices. No significant differences between the 2 levels of care were found in the scores on the HRQL questionnaire (Spanish version of the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire). There was a weak correlation between patients' perception of health and lung function parameters. Factors related to HRQL in the multivariate analysis were dyspnea, the presence of COPD exacerbations in the previous year, consequent visits to the emergency department, age, and degree of airflow restriction, but not level of patient care. CONCLUSIONS: Stable COPD patients' HRQL is not related to their level of care, be it primary or specialized, but is related to other factors such as dyspnea, presence of exacerbations or consequent visits to the emergency department, age, and degree of airflow restriction.

Calidad de vida en la enfermedad pulmonar obstructiva crónica. Influencia del nivel de asistencia de los pacientes / Quality of life with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: the influence of level of patient care

OBJETIVO: El estudio se realizó con el propósito de determinar los factores que se relacionan con la calidad de vida relacionada con la salud (CVRS) de los pacientes con enfermedad pulmonar obstructiva crónica (EPOC) estable y evaluar si existen diferencias según el nivel de asistencia de los pacientes (neumología o atención primaria). MATERIAL Y MÉTODO: Se trata de un estudio observacional, descriptivo, transversal y multicéntrico. La selección de la muestra se realizó mediante un muestreo aleatorizado estratificado por población regional entre médicos de familia y neumólogos de todo el territorio nacional. Para este trabajo se seleccionó a aquellos en los que se registró el nivel de asistencia y en los que el diagnóstico de EPOC se confirmó por espirometría. RESULTADOS: Se evaluó a 560 pacientes, 100 en atención primaria y 460 en neumología. No se detectaron diferencias significativas en las puntuaciones obtenidas en el cuestionario de calidad de vida (versión española del Cuestionario Respiratorio St. George) en ambos niveles asistenciales. La correlación entre el estado de salud percibido por los pacientes y los parámetros de función pulmonar fue débil. Los factores que se relacionaron con la CVRS en el análisis multivariante fueron la disnea, la existencia de reagudizaciones de la EPOC en el año previo, las visitas a urgencias por este motivo, la edad y el grado de limitación al flujo respiratorio, pero no el ámbito de asistencia de los pacientes. CONCLUSIONES: La CVRS de los pacientes con EPOC estable no se relaciona con el nivel de atención, ya sea asistencia primaria o neumología, pero sí con otros factores como la disnea, la existencia de agudizaciones o visitas a urgencias por este motivo, la edad y el grado de obstrucción al flujo respiratorio (AU)

Espirometría en atención primaria.Una necesidad inexcusable / Spirometry in primary care. An unavoidable neccessity

No disponible

No disponible