TY - JOUR
T1 - Validation of the COPD diagnostic questionnaire in an Australian general practice cohort
T2 - A cross-sectional study
AU - Stanley, Anthony J.
AU - Hasan, Iqbal
AU - Crockett, Alan J.
AU - van Schayck, Onno C P
AU - Zwar, Nicholas A.
PY - 2014/1/1
Y1 - 2014/1/1
N2 - Background: The gold standard for the diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is spirometry, but there are barriers to its use in primary care. Aims: To externally validate the COPD Diagnostic Questionnaire (CDQ) as a diagnostic tool in patients at increased risk in Australian general practice and to compare its performance with other CDQ validation studies. Methods: Patients were recruited from 36 general practices in Sydney, Australia. Former or current smokers aged 40-85 years with no prior COPD diagnosis were invited to a case-finding appointment with the practice nurse. The CDQ was collected and pre- and postbronchodilator spirometry was performed. Cases for whom complete CDQ data were present and the spirometry met quality standards were analysed. Results: Of 1,631 patients who attended case-finding recruitment, 1,054 (65%) could be analysed. Spirometry showed 13% had COPD. The ability of the CDQ to discriminate between patients with and without COPD was fair, represented by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.713. With a CDQ cut-off point value of 16.5 the sensitivity was 80% and specificity 47% and, at a cut-off point value of 19.5, the sensitivity was 63% and specificity 70%. Conclusions: The CDQ did not discriminate between patients with and without COPD accurately enough to use as a diagnostic tool in patients at increased risk of COPD in Australian general practice. Further research is needed on the value of the CDQ as a tool for selecting patients for spirometry.
AB - Background: The gold standard for the diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is spirometry, but there are barriers to its use in primary care. Aims: To externally validate the COPD Diagnostic Questionnaire (CDQ) as a diagnostic tool in patients at increased risk in Australian general practice and to compare its performance with other CDQ validation studies. Methods: Patients were recruited from 36 general practices in Sydney, Australia. Former or current smokers aged 40-85 years with no prior COPD diagnosis were invited to a case-finding appointment with the practice nurse. The CDQ was collected and pre- and postbronchodilator spirometry was performed. Cases for whom complete CDQ data were present and the spirometry met quality standards were analysed. Results: Of 1,631 patients who attended case-finding recruitment, 1,054 (65%) could be analysed. Spirometry showed 13% had COPD. The ability of the CDQ to discriminate between patients with and without COPD was fair, represented by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.713. With a CDQ cut-off point value of 16.5 the sensitivity was 80% and specificity 47% and, at a cut-off point value of 19.5, the sensitivity was 63% and specificity 70%. Conclusions: The CDQ did not discriminate between patients with and without COPD accurately enough to use as a diagnostic tool in patients at increased risk of COPD in Australian general practice. Further research is needed on the value of the CDQ as a tool for selecting patients for spirometry.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84895140741&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.4104/pcrj.2014.00015
DO - 10.4104/pcrj.2014.00015
M3 - Article
C2 - 24570082
AN - SCOPUS:84895140741
SN - 1471-4418
VL - 23
SP - 92
EP - 97
JO - Primary Care Respiratory Journal
JF - Primary Care Respiratory Journal
IS - 1
ER -