Accuracy of Vitalograph lung monitor as a screening test for COPD in primary care

Repurposing catheter ablation work-up to detect expiratory airflow limitation in patients with atrial fibrillation

Background

In atrial fibrillation (AF) patients, presence of expiratory airflow limitation may negatively impact treatment outcomes. AF patients are not routinely screened for expiratory airflow limitation, but existing examinations can help identify at-risk individuals. We aimed to assess the diagnostic value of repurposing existing assessments from the pre-ablation work-up to identify and understand the characteristics of affected patients.

Methods

We screened 110 consecutive AF patients scheduled for catheter ablation with handheld spirometry. Routine pre-ablation work-up included cardiac computed tomographic angiography (CCTA), transthoracic echocardiography and polygraphy. CCTA was analyzed qualitatively for emphysema and airway abnormalities. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to determine predictors of expiratory airflow limitation.

Results

We found that 25 % of patients had expiratory airflow limitation, which was undiagnosed in 86 % of these patients. These patients were more likely to have pulmonary abnormalities on CCTA, including emphysema (odds ratio [OR] 4.2, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.12-15.1, p < 0.05) and bronchial wall thickening (OR 2.6, 95 % CI 1.0-6.5, p < 0.05). The absence of pulmonary abnormalities on CCTA accurately distinguished patients with normal lung function from those with airflow limitation (negative predictive value: 85 %). Echocardiography and polygraphy did not contribute significantly to identifying airflow limitation.

Conclusions

In conclusion, routine pre-ablation CCTA can detect pulmonary abnormalities in AF patients with airflow limitation, guiding further pulmonary assessment. Future studies should investigate its impact on ablation procedure success.

Current Progress of COPD Early Detection: Key Points and Novel Strategies

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide, with approximately 70% to 80% of adults with COPD being undiagnosed. Patients with undiagnosed COPD are at increased risk of poor outcomes and a worsened quality of life, making early detection a crucial strategy to mitigate the impact of COPD and reduce the burden on healthcare systems. In the past decade, increased interest has been focused on the development of effective strategies and instrument for COPD early detection. However, identifying undiagnosed cases of COPD is still challenging. Both screening and case-finding approaches have been adopted to identify undiagnosed COPD, with case-finding being recommended by the 2023 Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) guideline and the updated United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPTF) recommendation. Nonetheless, the approaches, criteria, and instruments used for early detection of COPD are varied. However, advances in the taxonomy and risk factors of COPD are continuously being investigated. It is important to continuously assess the current state of knowledge on COPD early detection, given the challenges associated with identifying undiagnosed COPD. This review aims to highlight recent advances in early detection of COPD. To discuss the current challenge and opportunity in COPD early detection, providing an overview of existing literature on COPD case-finding strategies, including the approaches, criteria for subjects, and instruments. The review also summarizes the current progress in COPD case-findings and proposes a COPD case-finding flowchart as an efficient method for identifying at risk COPD patients.

Implementation of a screening and management pathway for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in patients with atrial fibrillation

AIMS

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) negatively impacts the efficacy of heart rhythm control treatments in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Although COPD is recognized as a risk factor for AF, practical guidance about how and when to screen for COPD is not available. Herein, we describe the implementation of an integrated screening and management pathway for COPD into the existing pre-ablation work-up in an AF outpatient clinic infrastructure.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Consecutive unselected patients accepted for AF catheter ablation in the Maastricht University Medical Center+ were prospectively screened for airflow limitation using handheld (micro)spirometry at the pre-ablation outpatient clinic supervised by an AF nurse. Patients with results suggestive of airflow limitation were offered referral to the pulmonologist. Handheld (micro)spirometry was performed in 232 AF patients, which provided interpretable results in 206 (88.8%) patients. Airflow limitation was observed in 47 patients (20.3%). Out of these 47 patients, 29 (62%) opted for referral to the pulmonologist. The primary reason for non-referral was low perceived symptom burden. Using this screening strategy 17 (out of 232; 7.3%) ultimately received a diagnosis of chronic respiratory disease, either COPD or asthma.

CONCLUSION

A COPD care pathway can successfully be embedded in an existing AF outpatient clinic infrastructure, using (micro)spirometry and remote analysis of results. Although one out of five patients had results suggestive of an underlying chronic respiratory disease, only 62% of these patients opted for a referral. Pre-selection of patients as well as patient education might increase the diagnostic yield and requires further research.

Accuracy of portable spirometers in the diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease A meta-analysis

Portable spirometers has been approved for diagnosing chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). However, their diagnostic accuracy has not been reviewed. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to systematically evaluate the diagnostic value of portable spirometers in detecting COPD. A comprehensive literature search for relevant studies was conducted in PubMed, Embase, CNKI, Wan Fang, and Web of Science databases. Pooled sensitivity, specificity, summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC), area under the curve (AUC), and other related indices were calculated using the bivariate mixed-effect model. Subgroup analysis was performed to explore the source of heterogeneity. Thirty one studies were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), diagnostic ratio (DOR), SROC, and AUC of the SROC of portable spirometers were 0.85 (0.81–0.88), 0.85 (0.81–0.88), 5.6 (4.4–7.3), 0.18 (0.15–0.22), 31 (21–46) and 0.91 (0.89–0.94), respectively. Among the three commonly used types of portable spirometers, the accuracy of PIKO-6 was higher (0.95) than that of COPD-6 (0.91) and PEF (0.82). Subgroup analysis indicated that the accuracy of a multi-indices portable spirometer was higher than that of a single-index one (P < 0.05). In addition, portable spirometry performed by professional technicians in tertiary hospitals was more accurate than for those conducted by trained technicians in primary care facilities and communities (P < 0.05). Moreover, the accuracy of studies conducted in developing country was superior to developed country (P < 0.05). Portable spirometers have high accuracy in the diagnosis of COPD. Multi-index COPD-6 and PIKO-6 displayed higher accuracy than others. Standardized training of instrument operators should be considered to achieve reliable results.

Case-finding and improving patient outcomes for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in primary care: the BLISS research programme including cluster RCT

Background

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease is a major contributor to morbidity, mortality and health service costs but is vastly underdiagnosed. Evidence on screening and how best to approach this is not clear. There are also uncertainties around the natural history (prognosis) of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and how it impacts on work performance.

Objectives

Work package 1: to evaluate alternative methods of screening for undiagnosed chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in primary care, with clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness analyses and an economic model of a routine screening programme. Work package 2: to recruit a primary care chronic obstructive pulmonary disease cohort, develop a prognostic model [Birmingham Lung Improvement StudieS (BLISS)] to predict risk of respiratory hospital admissions, validate an existing model to predict mortality risk, address some uncertainties about natural history and explore the potential for a home exercise intervention. Work package 3: to identify which factors are associated with employment, absenteeism, presenteeism (working while unwell) and evaluate the feasibility of offering formal occupational health assessment to improve work performance.

Design

Work package 1: a cluster randomised controlled trial with household-level randomised comparison of two alternative case-finding approaches in the intervention arm. Work package 2: cohort study – focus groups. Work package 3: subcohort – feasibility study.

Setting

Primary care settings in West Midlands, UK.

Participants

Work package 1: 74,818 people who have smoked aged 40–79 years without a previous chronic obstructive pulmonary disease diagnosis from 54 general practices. Work package 2: 741 patients with previously diagnosed chronic obstructive pulmonary disease from 71 practices and participants from the work package 1 randomised controlled trial. Twenty-six patients took part in focus groups. Work package 3: occupational subcohort with 248 patients in paid employment at baseline. Thirty-five patients took part in an occupational health intervention feasibility study.

Interventions

Work package 1: targeted case-finding – symptom screening questionnaire, administered opportunistically or additionally by post, followed by diagnostic post-bronchodilator spirometry. The comparator was routine care. Work package 2: twenty-three candidate variables selected from literature and expert reviews. Work package 3: sociodemographic, clinical and occupational characteristics; occupational health assessment and recommendations.

Main outcome measures

Work package 1: yield (screen-detected chronic obstructive pulmonary disease) and cost-effectiveness of case-finding; effectiveness of screening on respiratory hospitalisation and mortality after approximately 4 years. Work package 2: respiratory hospitalisation within 2 years, and barriers to and facilitators of physical activity. Work package 3: work performance – feasibility and acceptability of the occupational health intervention and study processes.

Results

Work package 1: targeted case-finding resulted in greater yield of previously undiagnosed chronic obstructive pulmonary disease than routine care at 1 year [n = 1278 (4%) vs. n = 337 (1%), respectively; adjusted odds ratio 7.45, 95% confidence interval 4.80 to 11.55], and a model-based estimate of a regular screening programme suggested an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £16,596 per additional quality-adjusted life-year gained. However, long-term follow-up of the trial showed that at ≈4 years there was no clear evidence that case-finding, compared with routine practice, was effective in reducing respiratory admissions (adjusted hazard ratio 1.04, 95% confidence interval 0.73 to1.47) or mortality (hazard ratio 1.15, 95% confidence interval 0.82 to 1.61). Work package 2: 2305 patients, comprising 1564 with previously diagnosed chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and 741 work package 1 participants (330 with and 411 without obstruction), were recruited. The BLISS prognostic model among cohort participants with confirmed airflow obstruction (n = 1894) included 6 of 23 candidate variables (i.e. age, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Assessment Test score, 12-month respiratory admissions, body mass index, diabetes and forced expiratory volume in 1 second percentage predicted). After internal validation and adjustment (uniform shrinkage factor 0.87, 95% confidence interval 0.72 to 1.02), the model discriminated well in predicting 2-year respiratory hospital admissions (c-statistic 0.75, 95% confidence interval 0.72 to 0.79). In focus groups, physical activity engagement was related to self-efficacy and symptom severity. Work package 3: in the occupational subcohort, increasing dyspnoea and exposure to inhaled irritants were associated with lower work productivity at baseline. Longitudinally, increasing exacerbations and worsening symptoms, but not a decline in airflow obstruction, were associated with absenteeism and presenteeism. The acceptability of the occupational health intervention was low, leading to low uptake and low implementation of recommendations and making a full trial unfeasible.

Limitations

Work package 1: even with the most intensive approach, only 38% of patients responded to the case-finding invitation. Management of case-found patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in primary care was generally poor, limiting interpretation of the long-term effectiveness of case-finding on clinical outcomes. Work package 2: the components of the BLISS model may not always be routinely available and calculation of the score requires a computerised system. Work package 3: relatively few cohort participants were in paid employment at baseline, limiting the interpretation of predictors of lower work productivity.

Conclusions

This programme has addressed some of the major uncertainties around screening for undiagnosed chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and has resulted in the development of a novel, accurate model for predicting respiratory hospitalisation in people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and the inception of a primary care chronic obstructive pulmonary disease cohort for longer-term follow-up. We have also identified factors that may affect work productivity in people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease as potential targets for future intervention.

Future work

We plan to obtain data for longer-term follow-up of trial participants at 10 years. The BLISS model needs to be externally validated. Our primary care chronic obstructive pulmonary disease cohort is a unique resource for addressing further questions to better understand the prognosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Trial registration

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN14930255.

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Programme Grants for Applied Research programme and will be published in full in Programme Grants for Applied Research; Vol. 9, No. 13. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

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

OBJECTIVES

To examine the accuracy and cost-effectiveness of various chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) screening tests and combinations within a Chinese primary care population.

DESIGN

Screening test accuracy study.

SETTING

Urban and rural community health centres in four municipalities of China: Beijing (north), Chengdu (southwest), Guangzhou (south) and Shenyang (northeast).

PARTICIPANTS

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.

INTERVENTIONS

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).

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES

Cases were defined as those with forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV₁)/forced vital capacity (FVC) below the lower limit of normal (LLN-GLI) on the reference test. Performance of individual screening tests and their combinations was evaluated, with cost-effectiveness analyses providing cost per additional true case detected.

RESULTS

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.

CONCLUSIONS

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.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN13357135.

Validity of the Handheld Expiratory Flowmeter for COPD Screening in the Primary Care Setting of China

Purpose

The use of simple and affordable screening tools for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is limited. We aimed to assess the validity of a handheld expiratory flowmeter (Vitalograph Ltd., COPD-6^®, Ireland) for COPD screening in Chinese primary care settings.

Methods

In our cross-sectional study, subjects were randomly selected in eight primary care settings. Tests with the handheld expiratory flowmeter and the conventional spirometry were sequentially performed on all participants. The correlation between the handheld expiratory flowmeter and the conventional spirometry was determined. Validity was determined by the area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUC) of the forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV₁)_/forced expiratory volume in six seconds (FEV₆) that used to detect airway obstruction. The sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, and likelihood ratio were calculated according to different FEV₁/FEV₆ cut-off points.

Results

A total of 229 subjects (15.4%) were diagnosed with airflow limitation by conventional spirometry. FEV₁, FEV₆, and FEV₁/FEV₆ measured by the handheld expiratory flowmeter were correlated with FEV₁, FVC, and FEV₁/FVC measured by the conventional spirometry (r=0.889, 0.835 and 0.647, p<0.001), respectively. AUC of the FEV₁/FEV₆ to determine airflow obstruction was 0.857 (95% CI: 0.826 to 0.888). No significant difference of AUC was observed between the symptomatic group and the asymptomatic group (AUC=0.869 vs 0.843, P=0.425). A similar phenomenon was found in the AUC of smokers and never-smokers (AUC=0.862 vs 0.840; P=0.515). The cut-off point for FEV₁/FEV₆ was 0.77 and the corresponding sensitivity and specificity were 71.2% and 89.8%, respectively.

Conclusion

The handheld expiratory flowmeter might be used as a screening device for COPD in Chinese primary care settings.

Performance of alternative COPD case-finding tools: a systematic review and meta-analysis

RATIONALE

Guidelines recommend pre-/post-bronchodilator spirometry for diagnosing COPD, but resource constraints limit the availability of spirometry in primary care in low- and middle-income countries. Although spirometry is the diagnostic gold standard, we shall assess alternative tools for settings without spirometry.

METHODS

A systematic literature review and meta-analysis was conducted, utilising Cochrane, CINAHL, Google Scholar, PubMed and Web of Science (search cut-off was May 01, 2020). Published studies comparing the accuracy of diagnostic tools for COPD with post-bronchodilator spirometry were considered. Studies without sensitivity/specificity data, without a separate validation sample and outside of primary care were excluded. Sensitivity, specificity and area under the curve (AUC) were assessed.

RESULTS

Of 7578 studies, 24 were included (14 635 participants). Hand devices yielded a larger AUC than questionnaires. The meta-analysis included 17 studies and the overall AUC of micro-spirometers (0.84, 95% CI 0.80-0.89) was larger when compared to the COPD population screener (COPD-PS) questionnaire (0.77, 95% CI 0.63-0.85) and the COPD diagnostic questionnaire (CDQ) (0.72, 95% CI 0.64-0.78). However, only the difference between micro-spirometers and the CDQ was significant.

CONCLUSIONS

The CDQ and the COPD-PS questionnaire were approximately equally accurate tools. Questionnaires ensured testing of symptomatic patients, but micro-spirometers were more accurate. A combination could increase accuracy but was not evaluated in the meta-analysis.

Novel App-Based Portable Spirometer for the Early Detection of COPD

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is preventable and treatable. However, many patients remain undiagnosed and untreated due to the underutilization or unavailability of spirometers. Accordingly, we used Spirobank Smart, an app-based spirometer, for facilitating the early detection of COPD in outpatient clinics. This prospective study recruited individuals who were at risk of COPD (i.e., with age of ≥40 years, ≥10 pack-years of smoking, and at least one respiratory symptoms) but had no previous COPD diagnosis. Eligible participants were examined with Spirobank Smart and then underwent confirmatory spirometry (performed using a diagnostic spirometer), regardless of their Spirobank Smart test results. COPD was defined and confirmed using the postbronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 s/forced vital capacity values of <0.70 as measured by confirmatory spirometry. A total of 767 participants were enrolled and examined using Spirobank Smart; 370 participants (94.3% men, mean age of 60.9 years and mean 42.6 pack-years of smoking) underwent confirmatory spirometry. Confirmatory spirometry identified COPD in 103 participants (27.8%). At the optimal cutoff point of 0.74 that was determined using Spirobank Smart for COPD diagnosis, the area under the receiver operating characteristic was 0.903 (95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.860-0.947). Multivariate logistic regression revealed that participants who have an FEV₁/FVC ratio of <74% that was determined using Spirobank Smart (odds ratio (OR) = 58.58, 95% CI = 27.29-125.75) and old age (OR = 3.23, 95% CI = 1.04-10.07 for 60 ≤ age < 65; OR = 5.82, 95% CI = 2.22-15.27 for age ≥ 65) had a higher risk of COPD. The Spirobank Smart is a simple and adequate tool for early COPD detection in outpatient clinics. Early diagnosis and appropriate therapy based on GOLD guidelines can positively influence respiratory symptoms and quality of life.

Study to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of different screening strategies for identifying undiagnosed COPD among residents (≥40 years) in four cities in China: protocol for a multicentre cross-sectional study on behalf of the Breathe Well group

INTRODUCTION

The latest chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) epidemiology survey in China estimated that there were 99 million potential COPD patients in the country, the majority of whom are undiagnosed. Screening for COPD in primary care settings is of vital importance for China, but it is not known which strategy would be the most suitable for adoption in primary care. Studies have been conducted to test the accuracy of questionnaires, expiratory peak flow meters and microspirometers to screen for COPD, but no study has directly evaluated and compared the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of these methods in the Chinese setting.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We present the protocol for a multicentre cross-sectional study, to be conducted in eight community hospitals from four cities among Chinese adults aged 40 years or older to investigate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of different case-finding methods for COPD, and determine the test performance of individual and combinations of screening tests and strategies in comparison with quality diagnostic spirometry. Index tests are screening questionnaires (COPD Diagnostic Questionnaire (CDQ), COPD Assessment in Primary Care To Identify Undiagnosed Respiratory Disease and Exacerbation Risk Questionnaire (CAPTURE), symptom-based questionnaire, COPD Screening Questionnaire (COPD-SQ)), microspirometer and peak flow. Each participant will complete all of these tests in one assessment. The primary analysis will compare the performance of a screening questionnaire with a handheld device. Secondary analyses will include the comparative performance of each index test, as well as a comparison of strategies where we use a screening questionnaire and a handheld device. Approximately 2000 participants will be recruited over 9 to 12 months.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study has been approved by Peking University Hospital and University of Birmingham. All study participants will provide written informed consent. Study results will be published in appropriate journal and presented at national and international conferences, as well as relevant social media and various community/stakeholder engagement activities.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN13357135.