BackgroundThis study aimed to assess the adherence rate of pharmacological treatment to the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) guideline published in 2011 and the prevalence of comorbidities among patients with COPD in Hong Kong (HK).MethodsPatients were recruited from five tertiary respiratory centers and followed up for 12 months. Data on baseline physiological, spirometric parameters, use of COPD medications and coexisting comorbidities were collected. The relationship between guideline adherence rate and subsequent COPD exacerbations was assessed.ResultsAltogether, 450 patients were recruited. The mean age was 73.7±8.5 years, and 92.2% of them were males. Approximately 95% of them were ever-smokers, and the mean post-bronchodilator (BD) forced expiratory volume in 1 second was 50.8%±21.7% predicted. The mean COPD Assessment Test and modified Medical Research Council Dyspnea Scale were 13.2±8.1 and 2.1±1.0, respectively. In all, five (1.1%), 164 (36.4%), eight (1.8%) and 273 (60.7%) patients belonged to COPD groups A, B, C and D, respectively. The guideline adherence rate for pharmacological treatment ranged from 47.7% to 58.1% in the three clinic visits over 12 months, with overprescription of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) and underutilization of long-acting BDs in group B COPD patients. Guideline nonadherence was not associated with increased risk of exacerbation after adjustment of confounding variables. However, this study was not powered to assess a difference in exacerbations. In all, 80.9% of patients had at least one comorbidity.ConclusionA suboptimal adherence to GOLD guideline 2011, with overprescription of ICS, was identified. The commonly found comorbidities also aligned with the trend observed in other observational cohorts.
Auto-CPAP and fixed-CPAP were equally effective in improving symptoms and health status in patients with severe OSA. Usage was higher with auto-CPAP, but more patients ultimately chose fixed-CPAP.
BackgroundPneumoconiosis patients receive community-based or home-based pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) for symptom management and enhancement of physical and mental well-being. This study aimed to review the clinical benefits of community-based rehabilitation programmes (CBRP) and home-based rehabilitation programmes (HBRP) for PR of pneumoconiosis patients.MethodsArchival data of pneumoconiosis patients who participated in CBRP and HBRP between 2008 and 2011 was analysed. There were 155 and 26 patients in the CBRP and HBRP respectively. The outcome measures used in the pre- and post-tests were Knowledge, Health Survey Short Form-12 (SF-12), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), 6-Min Walk Test (6MWT), and Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire (CRQ). Paired t-tests and the Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) using the patients’ baseline lung functions as the covariates were performed to examine the changes in the outcomes after completing the programmes. Hierarchical multiple regression analyses were used to examine the relationships between patient’s programme participation factors and different scores of the outcome measures.ResultsAfter controlling for patients’ baseline lung capacities, significant improvements were revealed among patients participated in CBRP in the scores of the 6MWT, Knowledge, HADS, SF-12 PCS, and CRQ emotion and mastery. The different scores in the Knowledge and HADS were correlated with the patients’ levels of programme participation. In contrast, significant improvements were only found in the scores of the Knowledge and 6MWT among patients who participated in HBRP. The gain scores of the 6MWT were correlated with the patients’ levels of programme participation.ConclusionsBoth CBRP and HBRP benefited patients’ levels of exercise tolerance and knowledge about the disease. CBRP provided greater benefits to patients’ mental and psychosocial needs. In contrast, HBRP was found to improve patients’ physical function, but did not have significant impacts on patients’ mental health and health-related quality of life. The attendance of patients and the participation of their relatives in treatment sessions were important factors in enhancing the positive effects of CBRP and HBRP. These positive outcomes confirm the value of pulmonary rehabilitation programmes for community-dwelling pneumoconiosis patients.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12890-018-0692-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Background: The real-world relationships between the demographic and clinical characteristics of asthma patients, their prehospitalization management and the frequency of hospitalization due to asthma exacerbation is poorly established. Objective: To determine the risk factors of recurrent asthma exacerbations requiring hospitalizations and evaluate the standard of baseline asthma care. Methods: A territory-wide, multicentre retrospective study in Hong Kong was performed. Medical records of patients aged ≥18 years admitted to 11 acute general hospitals from January 1 to December 31, 2016 for asthma exacerbations were reviewed.Results: There were 2280 patients with 3154 admissions (36.7% male, median age 66.0 [interquartile range: 48.0-81.0] years, 519 had ≥2 admissions). Among them, 1830 (80.3%) had at least one asthma-associated comorbidity, 1060 (46.5%) and 885 (38.9%) of patients had Accident and Emergency Department (AED) attendance and hospitalization in the preceding year, respectively. Patients with advancing age (incidence rate ratio [IRR]: 1.003 for every year increment), a history of AED visits or hospitalization (IRR: 1.018 and 1.070 for every additional episode, respectively)This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.