ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To assess the frequency and severity of 24-hour respiratory symptoms according to COPD GOLD-ABCD classification (2017-version), the distribution of the patients with COPD into GOLD categories using mMRC (≥2) or CAT (≥10) scores, and agreement between these cut-off points. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study (LASSYC study), 24-hour day respiratory symptoms were assessed by the Evaluating Respiratory Symptoms in COPD (E-RS) questionnaire, Nighttime Symptoms of COPD Instrument (NiSCI), Early Morning Symptoms of COPD Instrument (EMSCI), CAT and mMRC scores. RESULTS: Among the 734 patients with COPD, 61% were male, age 69.6±8.7 years, FEV1% post-BD 49.1±17.5%, mMRC 1.8±1.0 and CAT 15.3±.8.1. By mMRC 33.7% were group-A, 29.2% group-B, 10.2% group-C and 26.9% group-D. By CAT 22.3% were group-A, 41% group-B, 4.8% group-C and 31.9% group-D. Using the mMRC the severity of E-RS, NiSCI and EMSCI scores increased from group A to D. Using the CAT, the groups B and D had the higher scores. Agreement between mMRC and CAT was 89.5% (Kappa statistics=75.7%). For mMRC score of 2, CAT score of ≥11 showed the maximum Youden's index (1.34). For mMRC score of 1, CAT score of ≥9 and ≥10 showed the maximum Youden's index (1.48). CONCLUSION: GOLD COPD classification by CAT seems to better discriminate 24-hour symptoms. Results do not support the equivalent use of CAT≥10 and mMRC≥2 for assessing symptoms.
Subject(s)
Biomedical Research , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive , Cross-Sectional Studies , Dyspnea/diagnosis , Dyspnea/etiology , Humans , Male , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/diagnosis , Severity of Illness Index , Surveys and QuestionnairesSubject(s)
Humans , Thorax , Respiration , Latin America , Pandemics , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , SocietiesABSTRACT
ABSTRACT Objective To assess the frequency and severity of 24-hour respiratory symptoms according to COPD GOLD-ABCD classification (2017-version), the distribution of the patients with COPD into GOLD categories using mMRC (≥2) or CAT (≥10) scores, and agreement between these cut-off points. Methods In this cross-sectional study (LASSYC study), 24-hour day respiratory symptoms were assessed by the Evaluating Respiratory Symptoms in COPD (E-RS) questionnaire, Nighttime Symptoms of COPD Instrument (NiSCI), Early Morning Symptoms of COPD Instrument (EMSCI), CAT and mMRC scores. Results Among the 734 patients with COPD, 61% were male, age 69.6±8.7 years, FEV1% post-BD 49.1±17.5%, mMRC 1.8±1.0 and CAT 15.3±.8.1. By mMRC 33.7% were group-A, 29.2% group-B, 10.2% group-C and 26.9% group-D. By CAT 22.3% were group-A, 41% group-B, 4.8% group-C and 31.9% group-D. Using the mMRC the severity of E-RS, NiSCI and EMSCI scores increased from group A to D. Using the CAT, the groups B and D had the higher scores. Agreement between mMRC and CAT was 89.5% (Kappa statistics=75.7%). For mMRC score of 2, CAT score of ≥11 showed the maximum Youden's index (1.34). For mMRC score of 1, CAT score of ≥9 and ≥10 showed the maximum Youden's index (1.48). Conclusion GOLD COPD classification by CAT seems to better discriminate 24-hour symptoms. Results do not support the equivalent use of CAT≥10 and mMRC≥2 for assessing symptoms.
RESUMO Objetivo Avaliar a frequência e gravidade dos sintomas respiratórios de 24 horas de acordo com a classificação COPD GOLD-ABCD (versão 2017), a distribuição dos pacientes com DPOC nas categorias GOLD usando escores mMRC (≥2) ou CAT (≥10) e concordância entre esses pontos de corte. Métodos Neste estudo transversal (estudo LASSYC), os sintomas respiratórios diários de 24 horas foram avaliados pelo questionário Avaliando os Sintomas Respiratórios em DPOC (Evaluating Respiratory Symptoms - E-RS), Instrumento de Sintomas Noturnos de DPOC (Nighttime Symptoms of COPD Instrument -NiSCI), Instrumento de Sintomas Matinais de DPOC (Early Morning Symptoms of COPD Instrument - EMSCI), pontuações CAT e mMRC. Resultados Entre os 734 pacientes com DPOC, 61% eram do sexo masculino, idade 69,6 ± 8,7 anos, VEF1% pós-BD 49,1 ± 17,5%, mMRC 1,8 ± 1,0 e CAT 15,3 ± 0,8,1. Por mMRC 33,7% eram do grupo A, 29,2% do grupo B, 10,2% do grupo C e 26,9% do grupo D. Por CAT, 22,3% eram do grupo A, 41% do grupo B, 4,8% do grupo C e 31,9% do grupo D. Usando o mMRC, a gravidade dos escores E-RS, NiSCI e EMSCI aumentou do grupo A para D. Usando o CAT, os grupos B e D tiveram os escores mais altos. A concordância entre mMRC e CAT foi de 89,5% (estatística Kappa = 75,7%). Para a pontuação mMRC de 2, a pontuação CAT ≥11 mostrou o índice de Youden máximo (1,34). Para a pontuação mMRC de 1, a pontuação CAT ≥9 e ≥10 mostrou o índice de Youden máximo (1,48). Conclusão A classificação GOLD COPD por CAT parece discriminar melhor os sintomas de 24 horas. Os resultados não suportam o uso equivalente de CAT≥10 e mMRC≥2 para avaliação dos sintomas.
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/diagnosis , Biomedical Research , Severity of Illness Index , Cross-Sectional Studies , Surveys and Questionnaires , Dyspnea/diagnosis , Dyspnea/etiologyABSTRACT
Objetivo: La clasificación de la gravedad de la enfermedad pulmonar obstructiva crónica (EPOC) se basa, de acuerdo con la iniciativa GOLD, en el volumen espiratorio forzado en el primer segundo (FEV1) después de usar broncodilatador, expresado como porcentaje del esperado. El propósito de este trabajo ha sido determinar los valores de referencia para la espirometría después de la administración de broncodilatador. Sujetos y métodos: Se realizó un muestreo por conglomerados de sujetos de 40 años o más, representativos de las zonas metropolitanas de São Paulo, Ciudad de México, Montevideo, Santiago y Caracas. Se realizó una espirometría a 5.183 sujetos de acuerdo con las recomendaciones de la American Thoracic Society, antes y después de la inhalación de 200 μg de salbutamol. Se efectuaron regresiones lineales múltiples para los valores espirométricos FEV1, volumen espiratorio forzado en 6 s (FEV6), índice de flujo espiratorio máximo, capacidad vital forzada (FVC), FEV1/FEV6, FEV1/FVC y flujo mesoespiratorio forzado después del uso del broncodilatador, ajustando por sexo, edad y altura, en 887 sujetos sin evidencia de enfermedad pulmonar previa. Resultados: Los valores de referencia tras broncodilatador para FEV1, FEV1/FVC y FEV1/FEV6 fueron en promedio un 3% mayores que los obtenidos con la espirometría realizada antes de la inhalación del broncodilatador. Esta diferencia, que parece pequeña, causa un desplazamiento hacia arriba en el percentil 5 (límite inferior de la normalidad) de los valores esperados. Si se utiliza el valor de referencia prebroncodilatador, en lugar del posbroncodilatador, se genera un 3,2% de falsos negativos para obstrucción al flujo aéreo en el total de la población de 40 o más años de edad. Conclusiones: Los valores de referencia indicados son más apropiados para espirometrías realizadas después de la inhalación del broncodilatador y permiten minimizar los errores de clasificación
Objective: The criteria for disease severity established by the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease are based on forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) expressed as a percentage of the predicted value after application of a bronchodilator. This study aims to determine postbronchodilator spirometry reference values. Subjects and methods: A cluster sample of subjects aged 40 years or over was chosen to be representative of the metropolitan areas of 5 Latin American cities (São Paulo, Mexico City, Montevideo, Santiago, and Caracas). Spirometry was performed on 5183 subjects following the recommendations of the American Thoracic Society before and after inhalation of 200 μg of salbutamol. Multiple linear regression equations were fitted for the postbronchodilator spirometric valuesFEV1, forced expiratory volume in 6 seconds (FEV6), peak expiratory flow rate, forced vital capacity (FVC), FEV1/FEV6, FEV1/FVC and forced expiratory flow between 25% and 75% of vital capacity (FEF25-75). These were adjusted for sex, age, and height in 887 asymptomatic subjects with no history of lung disease. Results: The postbronchodilator reference values for FEV1, FEV1/FVC, and FEV1/FEV6 were on average 3% higher than those obtained before bronchodilation. This apparently small difference caused an upward shift in the 5th percentile (lower limit of normal) of the predicted values. When prebronchodilation instead of postbronchodilation reference values were used, 3.2% of the results for airflow obstruction in our population of over-40-year-olds were false negatives. Conclusions: The reported reference values are more appropriate for postbronchodilator spirometry and make it possible to reduce the number of misclassifications
