4.0 Article

Incidence of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease based on three spirometric diagnostic criteria in Sao Paulo, Brazil: a nine-year follow-up since the PLATINO prevalence study

Journal

SAO PAULO MEDICAL JOURNAL
Volume 133, Issue 3, Pages 245-251

Publisher

ASSOCIACAO PAULISTA MEDICINA
DOI: 10.1590/1516-3180.2015.9620902

Keywords

Pulmonary disease, chronic obstructive; Incidence; Diagnosis; Epidemiology; Spirometry

Ask authors/readers for more resources

CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a respiratory disease of high prevalence and socioeconomic impact worldwide. It affects approximately 16% of the population of Sao Paulo. The incidence of COPD is still unknown in Brazil. The aim of this study was to estimate new cases of COPD in a population-based sample in Sao Paulo, Brazil, using three different spirometric diagnostic criteria, and to assess the concordance between these criteria. DESIGN AND SETTING: Prospective cohort study, in the city of Sao Paulo, Brazil. METHODS: A questionnaire was applied and anthropometry and pre and post-bronchodilator spirometry were performed on the same subjects as in the initial PLATINO study (2003) in Sao Paulo. Data from this follow-up study were added to the original database of the initial phase. Incident COPD cases refer to subjects who developed the disease in accordance with each spirometric criterion during the nine-year follow-up period. The Statistical Package for the Social Sciences, version 17.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA) was used in the analysis and the significance level was set at P < 0.05. RESULTS: 613 subjects participated in the follow-up. New COPD cases ranged in frequency from 1.4% to 4.0%, depending on the diagnostic criterion used. The concordance between the criteria ranged from 35% to 60%. CONCLUSION: The incidence of COPD after a nine-year follow-up was high, but varied according to the spirometric criterion used. The agreement between the criteria for identifying new cases of the disease ranged from 35% to 60%.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.0
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available