Forno Erick, Abraham Neethu, Winger Daniel G, Rosas-Salazar Christian, Kurland Geoffrey, Weiner Daniel J
University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Division of Pulmonary Medicine, Department of Pediatrics, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Pediatr Allergy Immunol Pulmonol. 2018 Sep 1;31(3):139-145. doi: 10.1089/ped.2018.0906. Epub 2018 Sep 17.
Under-perception of pulmonary dysfunction may delay appropriate treatment, while over-perception may result in unnecessary treatments. To evaluate the ability of patients with asthma or cystic fibrosis and their subspecialty caregivers to assess changes in lung function based on their subjective clinical impressions. Patients were asked to qualitatively describe how they felt compared to their prior visit (same/better/worse) and to quantitatively estimate their forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV) after being reminded of their FEV at the prior visit. Providers made similar estimates based on history and physical examination and knowledge of prior FEV. After adjusting for relevant clinical covariates, lung function estimates were categorized as accurate (±5% of measured FEV), overestimated (>5% above measured), and underestimated (>5% below measured). One hundred nine patients estimated FEV on 179 occasions. Concordance between patient qualitative assessment and FEV-based categories was low ( = 0.08); 44% of patients reported feeling better than the FEV-based category showed. Quantitatively, 56% of patient estimates were accurate, 18% were underestimated, and 26% overestimated; accuracy improved with age (odds ratio = 1.16, = 0.01). Concordance between provider qualitative assessments and FEV-based category was moderate ( = 0.35); about 19% said their patient looked better than the FEV-based category showed. Quantitatively, 65% of provider estimates were accurate, 16% were underestimated, and 19% were overestimated; accuracy improved with years of experience. Patients' and providers' perceptions of lung function were low to moderately accurate. Relying on subjective impression may place patients at risk for unnecessary treatments or increased morbidity. These findings highlight the importance of objective lung function assessment.
对肺功能障碍的认识不足可能会延误适当的治疗,而认识过度则可能导致不必要的治疗。为了评估哮喘或囊性纤维化患者及其专科护理人员根据主观临床印象评估肺功能变化的能力。研究人员要求患者定性描述与上次就诊相比的感受(相同/更好/更差),并在提醒他们上次就诊时的第1秒用力呼气量(FEV)后,定量估计自己的FEV。医护人员根据病史、体格检查以及对患者上次FEV的了解做出类似的估计。在对相关临床协变量进行调整后,肺功能估计值被分为准确(在测量的FEV的±5%范围内)、高估(高于测量值的5%以上)和低估(低于测量值的5%以下)。109名患者在179次就诊时估计了FEV。患者定性评估与基于FEV的分类之间的一致性较低(κ=0.08);44%的患者报告感觉比基于FEV的分类显示的情况要好。在定量方面,56%的患者估计准确,18%被低估,26%被高估;准确性随年龄增长而提高(优势比=1.16,P=0.01)。医护人员定性评估与基于FEV的分类之间的一致性中等(κ=0.35);约19%的医护人员表示他们的患者看起来比基于FEV的分类显示的情况要好。在定量方面,65%的医护人员估计准确,16%被低估,19%被高估;准确性随工作年限的增加而提高。患者和医护人员对肺功能的认知准确性较低至中等。依赖主观印象可能会使患者面临接受不必要治疗或发病率增加的风险。这些发现凸显了客观肺功能评估的重要性。