Accuracy and cost-effectiveness of different screening strategies for identifying undiagnosed COPD among primary care patients (≥40 years) in China: a cross-sectional screening test accuracy study: findings from the Breathe Well group.
chronic airways disease
general medicine (see internal medicine)
respiratory medicine (see thoracic medicine)
Journal
BMJ open
ISSN: 2044-6055
Titre abrégé: BMJ Open
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101552874
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
23 09 2021
23 09 2021
Historique:
entrez:
24
9
2021
pubmed:
25
9
2021
medline:
3
11
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
To examine the accuracy and cost-effectiveness of various chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) screening tests and combinations within a Chinese primary care population. Screening test accuracy study. Urban and rural community health centres in four municipalities of China: Beijing (north), Chengdu (southwest), Guangzhou (south) and Shenyang (northeast). Community residents aged 40 years and above who attended community health centres for any reason were invited to participate. 2445 participants (mean age 59.8 (SD 9.6) years, 39.1% (n=956) male) completed the study (February-December 2019), 68.9% (n=1684) were never-smokers and 3.6% (n=88) had an existing COPD diagnosis. 13.7% (n=333) of participants had spirometry-confirmed airflow obstruction. Participants completed six index tests (screening questionnaires (COPD Diagnostic Questionnaire, COPD Assessment in Primary Care To Identify Undiagnosed Respiratory Disease and Exacerbation Risk (CAPTURE), Chinese Symptom-Based Questionnaire (C-SBQ), COPD-SQ), microspirometry (COPD-6), peak flow (model of peak flow meters used in the study (USPE)) and the reference test (ndd Easy On-PC). Cases were defined as those with forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV Airflow measurement devices (sensitivities 64.9% (95% CI 59.5% to 70.0%) and 67.3% (95% CI 61.9% to 72.3%), specificities 89.7% (95% CI 88.4% to 91.0%) and 82.6% (95% CI 80.9% to 84.2%) for microspirometry and peak flow, respectively) generally performed better than questionnaires, the most accurate of which was C-SBQ (sensitivity 63.1% (95% CI 57.6% to 68.3%) specificity 74.2% (95% CI 72.3% to 76.1%)). The combination of C-SBQ and microspirometry used in parallel maximised sensitivity (81.4%) (95% CI 76.8% to 85.4%) and had specificity of 68.0% (95% CI 66.0% to 70.0%), with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £64.20 (CNY385) per additional case detected compared with peak flow. Simple screening tests to identify undiagnosed COPD within the primary care setting in China is possible, and a combination of C-SBQ and microspirometry is the most sensitive and cost-effective. Further work is required to explore optimal cut-points and effectiveness of programme implementation. ISRCTN13357135.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34556515
pii: bmjopen-2021-051811
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-051811
pmc: PMC8461701
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e051811Informations de copyright
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Competing interests: None declared.
Références
J Biomed Inform. 2009 Apr;42(2):377-81
pubmed: 18929686
PLoS One. 2016 Jan 04;11(1):e0145571
pubmed: 26726887
Respiration. 2006;73(3):285-95
pubmed: 16330875
Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2013 Dec;17(12):1645-51
pubmed: 24200283
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2007 Oct 15;176(8):753-60
pubmed: 17575095
Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2018 Apr 27;13:1353-1364
pubmed: 29731623
NPJ Prim Care Respir Med. 2020 Jan 3;30(1):2
pubmed: 31900421
Lancet Respir Med. 2017 Sep;5(9):691-706
pubmed: 28822787
Chest. 2016 Dec;150(6):1269-1280
pubmed: 27693597
Am Rev Respir Dis. 1978 Dec;118(6 Pt 2):1-120
pubmed: 742764
Stat Med. 2002 Mar 30;21(6):835-52
pubmed: 11870820
Eur Respir J. 2009 Sep;34(3):648-54
pubmed: 19720809
BMJ Open. 2020 Nov 27;10(11):e035738
pubmed: 33247005
NPJ Prim Care Respir Med. 2014 Jul 10;24:14024
pubmed: 25010522
BMJ. 2003 Sep 20;327(7416):653-4
pubmed: 14500437
Prim Care Respir J. 2011 Jun;20(2):190-8, 2 p following 198
pubmed: 21597667
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2017 Mar 15;195(6):748-756
pubmed: 27783539
CMAJ. 2013 Aug 6;185(11):E537-44
pubmed: 23798453
Lancet. 2018 Apr 28;391(10131):1706-1717
pubmed: 29650248
BMJ Open. 2015 Oct 08;5(10):e008133
pubmed: 26450427
NPJ Prim Care Respir Med. 2021 May 20;31(1):28
pubmed: 34016999
Ann Fam Med. 2015 Jan-Feb;13(1):41-8
pubmed: 25583891
Chest. 2015 Oct;148(4):971-985
pubmed: 25950276
Lancet Respir Med. 2017 May;5(5):426-434
pubmed: 28389225
Sci Rep. 2016 Jul 26;6:30419
pubmed: 27456860
PLoS One. 2016 Apr 13;11(4):e0152266
pubmed: 27073880
Eur Respir J. 2005 Jul;26(1):153-61
pubmed: 15994402
BMC Fam Pract. 2016 Aug 19;17(1):112
pubmed: 27542843
J Biomed Inform. 2019 Jul;95:103208
pubmed: 31078660
Thorax. 2008 May;63(5):402-7
pubmed: 18234906
NPJ Prim Care Respir Med. 2014 Aug 14;24:14033
pubmed: 25119686
JAMA. 2016 Apr 05;315(13):1372-7
pubmed: 27046365