Mostrar o rexistro simple do ítem

dc.contributor.authorRepresas Represas, Cristina 
dc.contributor.authorFernández Villar, José Alberto 
dc.contributor.authorRuano Raviña, Alberto
dc.contributor.authorPriegue Carrera, Ana
dc.contributor.authorBotana Rial, María Isabel 
dc.date.accessioned2017-10-16T08:57:29Z
dc.date.available2017-10-16T08:57:29Z
dc.date.issued2016
dc.identifier.otherhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26726887es
dc.identifier.otherhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4699810/es
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11940/9781
dc.description.abstractThe underdiagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) could be improved through screening using portable devices simpler than conventional spirometers in specific healthcare settings to reach a higher percentage of the at-risk population. This study was designed to assess the validity and reliability of the COPD-6 portable device to screen for COPD in non-specialized healthcare settings. Prospective cohort study to validate a diagnostic test. Three cohorts were recruited: primary care (PC), emergency services (ES) and community pharmacies (CPh). individuals with risk factors for COPD (>40 years, smoking >10 pack-years, with respiratory symptoms). The values measured using the COPD-6 were FEV1, FEV6 and the FEV1/FEV6 ratio. Subsequently, participants underwent conventional spirometry at hospital, using a post-bronchodilator FEV1/FVC value <0.7 as the gold standard criterion for the COPD diagnosis. 437 participants were included, 362 were valid for the analysis. COPD was diagnosed in 114 patients (31.5%). The area under the ROC curve for the COPD-6 for COPD screening was 0.8.The best cut-off point for the FEV1/FEV6 ratio was 0.8 (sensitivity, 92.1%) using spirometry with the bronchodilator test as the gold standard. There were practically no differences in the COPD-6 performance in the different settings and also regarding age, gender and smoking status. The COPD-6 device is a valid tool for COPD screening in non-specialized healthcare settings. In this context, the best cut-off point for the FEV1/FEV6 ratio is 0.8.es
dc.description.sponsorshipFundación de la Sociedad Gallega de Patología Respiratoria (SOGAPAR)es
dc.description.sponsorshipEuropean Union Seventh Framework Programme [FP7/REGPOT-2012-2013.1] under grant agreement n° 316265, BIOCAPSes
dc.language.isoenges
dc.rightsAtribución 4.0 Internacional*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/*
dc.subject.meshSmoking*
dc.subject.meshPulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive*
dc.titleScreening for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: Validity and Reliability of a Portable Device in Non-Specialized Healthcare Settings.es
dc.typeArtigoes
dc.contributor.authorcorpStudy group of Validity of COPD-6 in nonspecialized healthcare settings
dc.identifier.doi10.1371/journal.pone.0145571
dc.identifier.essn1932-6203
dc.identifier.pmid26726887
dc.issue.number1es
dc.journal.titlePloS onees
dc.organizationServizo Galego de Saúde::Estrutura de Xestión Integrada (EOXI)::EOXI de Vigo - Complexo Hospitalario Universitario de Vigo::Neumoloxíaes
dc.page.initiale0145571es
dc.relation.projectIDinfo:eu-repo/grantAgreement/EC/FP7/316265es
dc.relation.publisherversionhttp://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0145571&type=printablees
dc.rights.accessRightsopenAccesses
dc.subject.decsenfermedad pulmonar obstructiva crónica*
dc.subject.decshábito de fumar*
dc.subject.keywordenfermedad pulmonar obstructiva cronicaes
dc.subject.keywordEPOCes
dc.twitterfalseen
dc.typefidesArtigo Científico (inclue Orixinal, Orixinal breve, Revisión Sistemática e Meta-análisis)es
dc.typesophosArtículo Originales
dc.volume.number11es


Ficheiros no ítem

Este ítem aparece na(s) seguinte(s) colección(s)

Mostrar o rexistro simple do ítem

Atribución 4.0 Internacional
A non ser que se indique outra cousa, a licenza do ítem descríbese comoAtribución 4.0 Internacional