ArticleAnnals of family medicine
Airway obstruction and bronchodilator responsiveness in adults with acute cough.
Article in Annals of family medicine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
21 authors at 13 institutions in 9 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWe sought to determine the prevalence of airway obstruction and bronchodilator responsiveness in adults consulting for acute cough in primary care.
methodsFamily physicians recruited 3,105 adult patients with acute cough (28 days or shorter) attending primary care practices in 12 European countries. After exclusion of patients with preexisting physician-diagnosed asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), we undertook complete case analysis of spirometry results (n = 1,947) 28 to 35 days after inclusion. Bronchodilator responsiveness was diagnosed if there were recurrent complaints of wheezing, cough, or dyspnea and an increase of the forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV(1)) of 12% or more after bronchodilation. Airway obstruction was diagnosed according to 2 thresholds for the (postbronchodilator) ratio of FEV(1) to forced vital capacity (FEV(1):FVC): less than 0.7 and less than the lower limit of normal.
resultsThere were 240 participants who showed bronchodilator responsiveness (12%), 193 (10%) had a FEV(1)/FVC ratio of less than 0.7, and 126 (6%) had a ratio of less than the lower limit of normal. Spearman's correlation between the 2 definitions of obstruction was 0.71 (P <.001), with discordance most pronounced among those younger than 30 years and in older participants.
conclusionsBoth bronchodilator responsiveness and persistent airway obstruction are common in adults without established asthma or COPD who consult for acute cough in primary care, which suggests a high risk of undiagnosed asthma and COPD. Different accepted methods to define airway obstruction detected different numbers of patients, especially at the extremes of age. As both conditions benefit from appropriate and timely interventions, clinicians should be aware and responsive to potential underdiagnosis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.