It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
COPD remains largely undiagnosed or is diagnosed late in the course of disease. We report findings of a specialist outreach programme to identify undiagnosed COPD in primary care. An electronic case-finding algorithm identified 1602 at-risk patients from 12 practices who were invited to attend the clinic. Three hundred and eighty-three (23.9%) responded and 288 were enrolled into the study. Forty-eight (16.6%) had undiagnosed mild and 28 (9.7%) had moderate airway obstruction, meeting spirometric diagnostic criteria for COPD. However, at 12 months only 8 suspected COPD patients (10.6%) had received a diagnostic label in their primary care record. This constituted 0.38% of the total patient population, as compared with 0.31% of control practices, p = 0.306. However, if all patients with airway obstruction received a coding of COPD, then the diagnosis rate in the intervention group would have risen by 0.84%. Despite the low take-up and diagnostic yield, this programme suggests that integrated case-finding strategies could improve COPD recognition.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details





1 University of Southampton, NIHR ARC Wessex, Faculty of Health Sciences, Southampton, UK (GRID:grid.5491.9) (ISNI:0000 0004 1936 9297); University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK (GRID:grid.430506.4)
2 University of Southampton, NIHR ARC Wessex, Faculty of Health Sciences, Southampton, UK (GRID:grid.5491.9) (ISNI:0000 0004 1936 9297)
3 University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK (GRID:grid.430506.4)
4 University of Southampton, Department of Primary Care and Population Sciences, Southampton, UK (GRID:grid.5491.9) (ISNI:0000 0004 1936 9297)
5 University of Birmingham, Institute of Applied Health Research, Birmingham, UK (GRID:grid.6572.6) (ISNI:0000 0004 1936 7486)
6 Observational and Pragmatic Research Institute, Singapore, Singapore (GRID:grid.500407.6); University of Aberdeen, Centre of Academic Primary Care, Division of Applied Health Sciences, Aberdeen, UK (GRID:grid.7107.1) (ISNI:0000 0004 1936 7291)
7 University of Southampton, Faculty of Medicine, Southampton, UK (GRID:grid.5491.9) (ISNI:0000 0004 1936 9297); University Hospitals Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, Southampton, UK (GRID:grid.430506.4); Southampton General Hospital, Wessex Investigational Sciences Hub, University of Southampton Faculty of Medicine, Southampton, UK (GRID:grid.123047.3) (ISNI:0000000103590315)