Search

Objective: Studies in hospital settings demonstrate that there is greater guideline adherence when care is delivered by a respiratory specialist, however, this has not been explored in primary care. The aim of this study is to determine the impact integrating respiratory specialists into primary care has on the delivery of guideline adherent chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) care., Methods: 18 general practitioner (GP) practices were randomised to provide either usual or specialist-led COPD care. Patients at participating practices were included if they had an existing diagnosis of COPD. Outcomes were measured at the individual patient level. The primary outcome was guideline adherence, assessed as achieving four or more items of the COPD care bundle. Secondary outcome measures included quality of life, number of exacerbations, number of COPD-related hospitalisations and respiratory outpatient attendances., Results: 586 patients from 10 practices randomised to the intervention and 656 patients from 8 practices randomised to the control arm of the study were included. The integration of respiratory specialists into GP practices led to a statistically significant (p<0.001) improvement in the provision of guideline adherent care when compared with usual care in this cohort (92.7% vs 70.1%) (OR 4.14, 95% CI 2.14 to 8.03)., Conclusion: This is the first study to demonstrate that guideline adherence is improved through the integration of respiratory specialists into GP practices to deliver annual COPD reviews. To facilitate changes in current healthcare practice and policy, the findings of this paper need to be viewed in combination with qualitative research exploring the acceptability of specialist integration., Trial Registration Number: NCT03482700., Competing Interests: Competing interests: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form at http://www.icmje.org/disclosure-of-interest/ (available on request from the corresponding author). AMT and KP were supported financially in relation to this study through a non-commercial grant from AstraZeneca. AMT has received grants not in relation to this study from Chiesi, NIHR, CSL Behring and Grifols Biotherapeutics. AS has received support from Birmingham NIHR Biomedical Research Centre. AP, PRE, RGE, HB and APD declare no support from any organisation for the submitted work; no financial relationships with any organisations that might have an interest in the submitted work in the previous 3 years, and no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objectives: To assess the feasibility of delivering a culturally tailored pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) programme and conducting a definitive randomised controlled trial (RCT)., Design: A two-arm, randomised feasibility trial with a mixed-methods process evaluation., Setting: Secondary care setting in Georgia, Europe., Participants: People with symptomatic spirometry-confirmed chronic obstructive pulmonary disease recruited from primary and secondary care., Interventions: Participants were randomised in a 1:1 ratio to a control group or intervention comprising 16 twice-weekly group PR sessions tailored to the Georgian setting., Primary and Secondary Outcome Measures: Feasibility of the intervention and RCT were assessed according to: study recruitment, consent and follow-up, intervention fidelity, adherence and acceptability, using questionnaires and measurements at baseline, programme end and 6 months, and through qualitative interviews., Results: The study recruited 60 participants (as planned): 54 (90%) were male, 10 (17%) had a forced expiratory volume in 1 second of ≤50% predicted. The mean MRC Dyspnoea Score was 3.3 (SD 0.5), and mean St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) 50.9 (SD 17.6). The rehabilitation specialists delivered the PR with fidelity. Thirteen (43.0%) participants attended at least 75% of the 16 planned sessions. Participants and rehabilitation specialists in the qualitative interviews reported that the programme was acceptable, but dropout rates were high in participants who lived outside Tbilisi and had to travel large distances. Outcome data were collected on 63.3% participants at 8 weeks and 88.0% participants at 6 months. Mean change in SGRQ total was -24.9 (95% CI -40.3 to -9.6) at programme end and -4.4 (95% CI -12.3 to 3.4) at 6 months follow-up for the intervention group and -0.5 (95% CI -8.1 to 7.0) and -8.1 (95% CI -16.5 to 0.3) for the usual care group at programme end and 6 months, respectively., Conclusions: It was feasible to deliver the tailored PR intervention. Approaches to improve uptake and adherence warrant further research., Trial Registration Number: ISRCTN16184185., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

COPD is increasingly common in China but is poorly understood by patients, medications are not used as prescribed and there is no access to recommended non-pharmacological treatment. We explored COPD patients' and general practitioners' (GPs) knowledge of COPD, views on its management and the acceptability of a flexible lung health service (LHS) offering health education, exercise, self-management, smoking cessation and mental health support. Using a convergent mixed methods design, data were collected from patients and GPs using focus groups (FGs) in four Chinese cities, questionnaires were also used to collect data from patients. FGs were audio-recorded and transcribed. Quantitative data were analysed descriptively, thematic framework analysis was used for the qualitative data. Two-hundred fifty-one patients completed the questionnaire; 39 patients and 30 GPs participated in ten separate FGs. Three overarching themes were identified: patients' lack of knowledge/understanding of COPD, current management of COPD not meeting patients' needs and LHS design, which was well received by patients and GPs. Participants wanted COPD education, TaiChi, psychological support and WeChat for social support. 39% of survey responders did not know what to do when their breathing worsened and 24% did not know how to use their inhalers. 36% of survey respondents requested guided relaxation. Overall, participants did not fully understand the implications of COPD and current treatment was sub-optimal. There was support for developing a culturally appropriate intervention meeting Chinese patients' needs, health beliefs, and local healthcare delivery. Further research should explore the feasibility of such a service., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Objectives: To examine the accuracy and cost-effectiveness of various chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) screening tests and combinations within a Chinese primary care population., Design: Screening test accuracy study., Setting: Urban and rural community health centres in four municipalities of China: Beijing (north), Chengdu (southwest), Guangzhou (south) and Shenyang (northeast)., Participants: Community residents aged 40 years and above who attended community health centres for any reason were invited to participate. 2445 participants (mean age 59.8 (SD 9.6) years, 39.1% (n=956) male) completed the study (February-December 2019), 68.9% (n=1684) were never-smokers and 3.6% (n=88) had an existing COPD diagnosis. 13.7% (n=333) of participants had spirometry-confirmed airflow obstruction., Interventions: Participants completed six index tests (screening questionnaires (COPD Diagnostic Questionnaire, COPD Assessment in Primary Care To Identify Undiagnosed Respiratory Disease and Exacerbation Risk (CAPTURE), Chinese Symptom-Based Questionnaire (C-SBQ), COPD-SQ), microspirometry (COPD-6), peak flow (model of peak flow meters used in the study (USPE)) and the reference test (ndd Easy On-PC)., Primary and Secondary Outcomes: Cases were defined as those with forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV 1 )/forced vital capacity (FVC) below the lower limit of normal (LLN-GLI) on the reference test. Performance of individual screening tests and their combinations was evaluated, with cost-effectiveness analyses providing cost per additional true case detected., Results: Airflow measurement devices (sensitivities 64.9% (95% CI 59.5% to 70.0%) and 67.3% (95% CI 61.9% to 72.3%), specificities 89.7% (95% CI 88.4% to 91.0%) and 82.6% (95% CI 80.9% to 84.2%) for microspirometry and peak flow, respectively) generally performed better than questionnaires, the most accurate of which was C-SBQ (sensitivity 63.1% (95% CI 57.6% to 68.3%) specificity 74.2% (95% CI 72.3% to 76.1%)). The combination of C-SBQ and microspirometry used in parallel maximised sensitivity (81.4%) (95% CI 76.8% to 85.4%) and had specificity of 68.0% (95% CI 66.0% to 70.0%), with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £64.20 (CNY385) per additional case detected compared with peak flow., Conclusions: Simple screening tests to identify undiagnosed COPD within the primary care setting in China is possible, and a combination of C-SBQ and microspirometry is the most sensitive and cost-effective. Further work is required to explore optimal cut-points and effectiveness of programme implementation., Trial Registration Number: ISRCTN13357135., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: The latest chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) epidemiology survey in China estimated that there were 99 million potential COPD patients in the country, the majority of whom are undiagnosed. Screening for COPD in primary care settings is of vital importance for China, but it is not known which strategy would be the most suitable for adoption in primary care. Studies have been conducted to test the accuracy of questionnaires, expiratory peak flow meters and microspirometers to screen for COPD, but no study has directly evaluated and compared the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of these methods in the Chinese setting., Methods and Analysis: We present the protocol for a multicentre cross-sectional study, to be conducted in eight community hospitals from four cities among Chinese adults aged 40 years or older to investigate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of different case-finding methods for COPD, and determine the test performance of individual and combinations of screening tests and strategies in comparison with quality diagnostic spirometry. Index tests are screening questionnaires (COPD Diagnostic Questionnaire (CDQ), COPD Assessment in Primary Care To Identify Undiagnosed Respiratory Disease and Exacerbation Risk Questionnaire (CAPTURE), symptom-based questionnaire, COPD Screening Questionnaire (COPD-SQ)), microspirometer and peak flow. Each participant will complete all of these tests in one assessment. The primary analysis will compare the performance of a screening questionnaire with a handheld device. Secondary analyses will include the comparative performance of each index test, as well as a comparison of strategies where we use a screening questionnaire and a handheld device. Approximately 2000 participants will be recruited over 9 to 12 months., Ethics and Dissemination: The study has been approved by Peking University Hospital and University of Birmingham. All study participants will provide written informed consent. Study results will be published in appropriate journal and presented at national and international conferences, as well as relevant social media and various community/stakeholder engagement activities., Trial Registration Number: ISRCTN13357135., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Objectives: To investigate the impact of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) case finding on clinical care., Design: We conducted a prospective observational analysis of data from a pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial in primary care in the West Midlands, UK (TargetCOPD). This compared alternative methods of COPD case finding against usual care. Data were extracted from electronic healthcare records and self-reported questionnaires for a subset of patients with newly diagnosed COPD., Setting: 50 general practices that participated in the TargetCOPD trial., Participants: Patients aged 40-79 years newly identified with COPD by targeted case finding or by usual care, from 10 August 2012 to 22 June 2014., Primary and Secondary Outcome Measures: The primary outcome was addition to a COPD register by the end of the trial. The secondary outcome was a clinical care score, derived from the sum of clinical assessments and relevant interventions. Associations between participant characteristics and the primary and secondary outcomes were assessed using multilevel regression., Results: 857 patients identified with COPD by case finding and 764 by usual care were included. Only 21.2% of case-found patients had been added to a COPD register, compared with 92.7% of those diagnosed by usual care. The odds of being added were greater in smokers (adjusted OR 8.68, 95% CI 2.53 to 29.8), and in those with lower percentage of predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 s (adjusted OR 0.96 per percentage rise, 95% CI 0.95 to 0.98). Patients who had been added to a COPD register had a significantly higher clinical care score (mean difference 5.06, 95% CI 4.36 to 5.75)., Conclusions: Only one in five case-found patients had been registered with COPD. Patients added to a COPD register received significantly higher levels of appropriate clinical care., Trial Registration Number: ISRCTN14930255; Post-results., Competing Interests: Competing interests: PA, REJ and DAF were principle investigators for the Birmingham Lung Improvement StudieS (BLISS) programme, funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) under its Programme Grants for Applied Research (grant reference number RP-PG-0109-10061). We report grants from various NIHR studies. PA is the Chair of the NIHR Public Health Research (PHR) Funding committee., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Reviews suggest that the ADO score is the most discriminatory prognostic score for predicting mortality among chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients, but a full evaluation and external validation within primary care settings is critical before implementation., Objectives: To validate the ADO score in prevalent and screen-detected primary care COPD cases at 3 years and at shorter time periods., Patients and Methods: One thousand eight hundred and ninety-two COPD cases were recruited between 2012 and 2014 from 71 United Kingdom general practices as part of the Birmingham COPD Cohort study. Cases were either on the practice COPD register or screen-detected. We validated the ADO score for predicting 3-year mortality with 1-year and 2-year mortality as secondary endpoints using discrimination (area-under-the-curve (AUC)) and calibration plots., Results: One hundred and fifty-four deaths occurred within 3 years. The ADO score was discriminatory for predicting 3-year mortality (AUC= 0.74; 95% CI: 0.69-0.79). Similar performance was found for 1- (AUC= 0.73; 0.66-0.80) and 2-year mortality (0.72; 0.67-0.76). The ADO score showed reasonable calibration for predicting 3-year mortality (calibration slope 0.95; 0.70-1.19) but over-predicted in cases with higher predicted risks of mortality at 1 (0.79; 0.45-1.13) and 2-year (0.79; 0.57-1.01) mortality., Discussion: The ADO score showed promising discrimination in predicting 3-year mortality in a primary care population including screen-detected cases. It may need to be recalibrated if it is used to provide risk predictions for 1- or 2-year mortality since, in these time-periods, over-prediction was evident, especially in cases with higher predicted mortality risks., Competing Interests: FV currently supervises two Ph.D. students who are employed with F. Hoffmann La Roche Ltd. Basel, Switzerland. He has not received any reimbursements for this and the Ph.D. topics are not related to this paper. FMEF reports personal fees from AstraZeneca, personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, personal fees from Chiesi, personal fees from GlaxoSmithKline, grants and personal fees from Novartis, grants and personal fees from MedImmune, personal fees from TEVA, outside the submitted work. AS reports grants from Astra Zeneca, outside the submitted work, grants from NIHR, during the conduct of the study. AMT reports grants from Linde REAL fund, grants from Alpha 1 Foundation, non-financial support from GSK, personal fees and non-financial support from Boehringer Ingelheim, grants, personal fees and non-financial support from Chiesi, grants, personal fees and non-financial support from AstraZeneca, grants from Grifols Biotherapeutics, outside of submitted work, personal fees from CSL Behring, personal fees from Pfizer, during the conduct of the study. PA, DF, AS, and REJ hold a grant from NIHR (Programme Grant, 2010–2018) that supported the development of the Birmingham COPD Cohort analysed in the submitted paper. PA holds other NIHR grants and is Deputy chair of the NIHR PHR Funding committee. The authors report no other conflicts of interest in this work., (© 2019 Keene et al.)

Introduction: 'One-off' systematic case-finding for COPD using a respiratory screening questionnaire is more effective and cost-effective than routine care at identifying new cases. However, it is not known whether early diagnosis and treatment is beneficial in the longer term. We estimated the long-term cost-effectiveness of a regular case-finding programme in primary care., Methods: A Markov decision analytic model was developed to compare the cost-effectiveness of a 3-yearly systematic case-finding programme targeted to ever smokers aged ≥50 years with the current routine diagnostic process in UK primary care. Patient-level data on case-finding pathways was obtained from a large randomised controlled trial. Information on the natural history of COPD and treatment effects was obtained from a linked COPD cohort, UK primary care database and published literature. The discounted lifetime cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained was calculated from a health service perspective., Results: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of systematic case-finding versus current care was £16 596 per additional QALY gained, with a 78% probability of cost-effectiveness at a £20 000 per QALY willingness-to-pay threshold. The base case result was robust to multiple one-way sensitivity analyses. The main drivers were response rate to the initial screening questionnaire and attendance rate for the confirmatory spirometry test., Discussion: Regular systematic case-finding for COPD using a screening questionnaire in primary care is likely to be cost-effective in the long-term despite uncertainties in treatment effectiveness. Further knowledge of the natural history of case-found patients and the effectiveness of their management will improve confidence to implement such an approach., Competing Interests: Competing interests: KKC reports grants from Pfizer China, outside of the submitted work. RS reports personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, personal fees from GSK, personal fees from Chiesi, personal fees from Takeda, personal fees from Novartis, personal fees from Polyphor, grants from CSL Behring, grants from Talecris, and personal fees from Dyax, outside of the submitted work. AMT reports grants from Linde REAL fund, grants from Alpha 1 Foundation, non-financial support from GSK, non-financial support from Boehringer Ingelheim, personal fees and non-financial support from Chiesi and personal fees and non-financial support from AZ, outside of the submitted work. SJ, PA, REJ, KKC, MM KJ, RR, DF, SS, AD, BGC, RS, JGA and SG report grants from NIHR, during the conduct of the study. Other authors declare no competing interests., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Consensus on the definition of airflow obstruction to diagnose COPD remains unresolved., Methods: We undertook systematic case finding for COPD in primary care using the fixed ratio (FR) criterion (forced expiratory volume in 1 s/forced vital capacity [FEV 1 /FVC] <0.7) for defining airflow obstruction and also using the lower limit of normal (LLN). We then compared the clinical characteristics of those identified by the 2 criteria., Results: A total of 3,721 individuals reporting respiratory symptoms were invited for spirometry. A total of 2,607 attended (mean age 60.4 years, 52.8% male, 29.8% current smokers) and 32.6% had airflow obstruction by FR ("FR+") and 20.2% by LLN ("LLN+"). Compared with the LLN+/FR+ group, the LLN-/FR+ group (12.4%) was significantly older, had higher FEV 1 and FEV 1 /FVC, lower COPD assessment test scores, and less cough, sputum, and wheeze, but was significantly more likely to report a diagnosis of heart disease (14.2% versus 6.9%, p <0.001). Compared with the LLN+/FR+ group, the LLN-/FR- group was younger, had a higher body mass index, fewer pack-years, a lower prevalence of respiratory symptoms except for dyspnea, and lower FVC and higher FEV 1 . The probability of known heart disease was significantly lower in the LLN+/FR+ group compared with those with preserved lung function (LLN-/FR-) (adjusted odds ratio 0.62, 95% CI: 0.43-0.90) but this was not seen in the LLN-/FR+ group (adjusted odds ratio 0.90, 95% CI: 0.63-1.29)., Conclusion: In symptomatic individuals, defining airflow obstruction by FR instead of LLN identifies a significant number of individuals who have less respiratory and more cardiac clinical characteristics., Competing Interests: Disclosure The authors report no conflicts of interest in this work.

Background: Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are more likely to take time off work (absenteeism) and report poor performance at work (presenteeism) compared to those without COPD. Little is known about the modifiable factors associated with these work productivity outcomes., Aim: To assess the factors associated with work productivity among COPD patients., Methods: Cross-sectional analysis of baseline data from a subsample (those in paid employment) of the Birmingham COPD Cohort study. Absenteeism was defined by self-report over the previous 12 months. Presenteeism was assessed using the Stanford Presenteeism Scale. Logistic regression analysis was used to assess the effects of sociodemographic, clinical and occupational characteristics on work productivity., Results: Among 348 included participants, increasing dyspnoea was the only factor associated with both absenteeism and presenteeism (p for trend<0.01). Additionally, increasing history of occupational exposure to vapours, gases, dusts or fumes (VGDF) was independently associated with presenteeism (p for trend<0.01)., Conclusions: This is the first study to identify important factors associated with poor work productivity among patients with COPD. Future studies should evaluate interventions aimed at managing breathlessness and reducing occupational exposures to VGDF on work productivity among patients with COPD., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.)

Background: Employment rates among those with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are lower than those without COPD, but little is known about the factors that affect COPD patients' ability to work., Methods: Multivariable analysis of the Birmingham COPD Cohort Study baseline data was used to assess the associations between lifestyle, clinical, and occupational characteristics and likelihood of being in paid employment among working-age COPD patients., Results: In total, 608 of 1,889 COPD participants were of working age, of whom 248 (40.8%) were in work. Older age (60-64 years vs 30-49 years: odds ratio [OR] =0.28; 95% confidence interval [CI] =0.12-0.65), lower educational level (no formal qualification vs degree/higher level: OR =0.43; 95% CI =0.19-0.97), poorer prognostic score (highest vs lowest quartile of modified body mass index, airflow obstruction, dyspnea, and exercise (BODE) score: OR =0.10; 95% CI =0.03-0.33), and history of high occupational exposure to vapors, gases, dusts, or fumes (VGDF; high VGDF vs no VGDF exposure: OR =0.32; 95% CI =0.12-0.85) were associated with a lower probability of being employed. Only the degree of breathlessness of BODE was significantly associated with employment., Conclusion: This is the first study to comprehensively assess the characteristics associated with employment in a community sample of people with COPD. Future interventions should focus on managing breathlessness and reducing occupational exposures to VGDF to improve the work capability among those with COPD., Competing Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest in this work.

Background: Many individuals with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) remain undiagnosed worldwide. Health-care organisations are implementing case-finding programmes without good evidence of which are the most effective and cost-effective approaches. We assessed the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of two alternative approaches to targeted case finding for COPD compared with routine practice., Methods: In this cluster-randomised controlled trial, participating general practices in the West Midlands, UK, were randomly assigned (1:1), via a computer-generated block randomisation sequence, to either a targeted case-finding group or a routine care group. Eligible patients were ever-smokers aged 40-79 years without a previously recorded diagnosis of COPD. Patients in the targeted case-finding group were further randomly assigned (1:1) via their household to receive either a screening questionnaire at the general practitioner (GP) consultation (opportunistic) or a screening questionnaire at the GP consultation plus a mailed questionnaire (active). Respondents reporting relevant respiratory symptoms were invited for post-bronchodilator spirometry. Patients, clinicians, and investigators were not masked to allocation, but group allocation was concealed from the researchers who performed the spirometry assessments. Primary outcomes were the percentage of the eligible population diagnosed with COPD within 1 year (defined as post-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 s [FEV1] to forced vital capacity [FVC] ratio <0·7 in patients with symptoms or a new diagnosis on their GP record) and cost per new COPD diagnosis. Multiple logistic and Poisson regression were used to estimate effect sizes. Costs were obtained from the trial. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, number ISRCTN14930255., Findings: From Aug 10, 2012, to June 22, 2014, 74 818 eligible patients from 54 diverse general practices were randomly assigned and completed the trial. At 1 year, 1278 (4%) cases of COPD were newly detected in 32 789 eligible patients in the targeted case-finding group compared with 337 (1%) cases in 42 029 patients in the routine care group (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 7·45 [95% CI 4·80-11·55], p<0·0001). The percentage of newly detected COPD cases was higher in the active case-finding group (822 [5%] of 15 378) than in the opportunistic case-finding group (370 [2%] of 15 387; adjusted OR 2·34 [2·06-2·66], p<0·0001; adjusted risk difference 2·9 per 100 patients [95% CI 2·3-3·6], p<0·0001). Active case finding was more cost-effective than opportunistic case finding (£333 vs £376 per case detected, respectively)., Interpretation: In this well established primary care system, routine practice identified few new cases of COPD. An active targeted approach to case finding including mailed screening questionnaires before spirometry is a cost-effective way to identify undiagnosed patients and has the potential to improve their health., Funding: National Institute for Health Research., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: This systematic review aimed to identify the most effective components of interventions to facilitate self-management of health care behaviors for patients with COPD. PROSPERO registration number CRD42011001588., Methods: We used standard review methods with a systematic search to May 2012 for randomized controlled trials of self-management interventions reporting hospital admissions or health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Mean differences (MD), hazard ratios, and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated and pooled using random-effects meta-analyses. Effects among different subgroups of interventions were explored including single/multiple components and multicomponent interventions with/without exercise., Results: One hundred and seventy-three randomized controlled trials were identified. Self-management interventions had a minimal effect on hospital admission rates. Multicomponent interventions improved HRQoL (studies with follow-up >6 months St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (MD 2.40, 95% CI 0.75-4.04, I (2) 57.9). Exercise was an effective individual component (St George's Respiratory Questionnaire at 3 months MD 4.87, 95% CI 3.96-5.79, I (2) 0%)., Conclusion: While many self-management interventions increased HRQoL, little effect was seen on hospital admissions. More trials should report admissions and follow-up participants beyond the end of the intervention.

Background: Self-management (SM) support for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is variable in its coverage, content, method and timing of delivery. There is insufficient evidence for which SM interventions are the most effective and cost-effective., Objectives: To undertake (1) a systematic review of the evidence for the effectiveness of SM interventions commencing within 6 weeks of hospital discharge for an exacerbation for COPD (review 1); (2) a systematic review of the qualitative evidence about patient satisfaction, acceptance and barriers to SM interventions (review 2); (3) a systematic review of the cost-effectiveness of SM support interventions within 6 weeks of hospital discharge for an exacerbation of COPD (review 3); (4) a cost-effectiveness analysis and economic model of post-exacerbation SM support compared with usual care (UC) (economic model); and (5) a wider systematic review of the evidence of the effectiveness of SM support, including interventions (such as pulmonary rehabilitation) in which there are significant components of SM, to identify which components are the most important in reducing exacerbations, hospital admissions/readmissions and improving quality of life (review 4)., Methods: The following electronic databases were searched from inception to May 2012: MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Science Citation Index [Institute of Scientific Information (ISI)]. Subject-specific databases were also searched: PEDro physiotherapy evidence database, PsycINFO and the Cochrane Airways Group Register of Trials. Ongoing studies were sourced through the metaRegister of Current Controlled Trials, International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number database, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov. Specialist abstract and conference proceedings were sourced through ISI's Conference Proceedings Citation Index and British Library's Electronic Table of Contents (Zetoc). Hand-searching through European Respiratory Society, the American Thoracic Society and British Thoracic Society conference proceedings from 2010 to 2012 was also undertaken, and selected websites were also examined. Title, abstracts and full texts of potentially relevant studies were scanned by two independent reviewers. Primary studies were included if ≈90% of the population had COPD, the majority were of at least moderate severity and reported on any intervention that included a SM component or package. Accepted study designs and outcomes differed between the reviews. Risk of bias for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) was assessed using the Cochrane tool. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to combine studies where appropriate. A Markov model, taking a 30-year time horizon, compared a SM intervention immediately following a hospital admission for an acute exacerbation with UC. Incremental costs and quality-adjusted life-years were calculated, with sensitivity analyses., Results: From 13,355 abstracts, 10 RCTs were included for review 1, one study each for reviews 2 and 3, and 174 RCTs for review 4. Available studies were heterogeneous and many were of poor quality. Meta-analysis identified no evidence of benefit of post-discharge SM support on admissions [hazard ratio (HR) 0.78, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.52 to 1.17], mortality (HR 1.07, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.54) and most other health outcomes. A modest improvement in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was identified but this was possibly biased due to high loss to follow-up. The economic model was speculative due to uncertainty in impact on readmissions. Compared with UC, post-discharge SM support (delivered within 6 weeks of discharge) was more costly and resulted in better outcomes (£683 cost difference and 0.0831 QALY gain). Studies assessing the effect of individual components were few but only exercise significantly improved HRQoL (3-month St George's Respiratory Questionnaire 4.87, 95% CI 3.96 to 5.79). Multicomponent interventions produced an improved HRQoL compared with UC (mean difference 6.50, 95% CI 3.62 to 9.39, at 3 months). Results were consistent with a potential reduction in admissions. Interventions with more enhanced care from health-care professionals improved HRQoL and reduced admissions at 1-year follow-up. Interventions that included supervised or unsupervised structured exercise resulted in significant and clinically important improvements in HRQoL up to 6 months., Limitations: This review was based on a comprehensive search strategy that should have identified most of the relevant studies. The main limitations result from the heterogeneity of studies available and widespread problems with their design and reporting., Conclusions: There was little evidence of benefit of providing SM support to patients shortly after discharge from hospital, although effects observed were consistent with possible improvement in HRQoL and reduction in hospital admissions. It was not easy to tease out the most effective components of SM support packages, although interventions containing exercise seemed the most effective. Future work should include qualitative studies to explore barriers and facilitators to SM post exacerbation and novel approaches to affect behaviour change, tailored to the individual and their circumstances. Any new trials should be properly designed and conducted, with special attention to reducing loss to follow-up. Individual participant data meta-analysis may help to identify the most effective components of SM interventions., Study Registration: This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42011001588., Funding: The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.