Accuracy and cost-effectiveness of different screening strategies for identifying undiagnosed COPD among primary care patients (≥40 years) in China: a cross-sectional screening test accuracy study: findings from the Breathe Well group

• Published in: BMJ open 2021-09, Vol.11 (9), p.e051811-e051811
• Main Authors: Pan, Zihan, Dickens, Andrew P, Chi, Chunhua, Kong, Xia, Enocson, Alexandra, G Cooper, Brendan, Adab, Peymané, Cheng, Kar Keung, Sitch, Alice J, Jowett, Sue, Adams, Rachel, Correia-de-Sousa, Jaime, Farley, Amanda, Gale, Nicola K, Jolly, Kate, Maglakelidze, Mariam, Maglakelidze, Tamaz, M Martins, Sonia, Stavrikj, Katarina, Stelmach, Rafael, Turner, Alice M, Williams, Sian, E Jordan, Rachel
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Accuracy; chronic airways disease; Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; Community health care; Cost analysis; general medicine (see internal medicine); Medical research; Primary care; Questionnaires; Respiratory Medicine; respiratory medicine (see thoracic medicine); Spirometry
• ISSN: 2044-6055; 2044-6055
• DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-051811

ObjectivesTo examine the accuracy and cost-effectiveness of various chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) screening tests and combinations within a Chinese primary care population.DesignScreening test accuracy study.SettingUrban and rural community health centres in four municipalities of China: Beijing (north), Chengdu (southwest), Guangzhou (south) and Shenyang (northeast).ParticipantsCommunity 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.InterventionsParticipants 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 outcomesCases were defined as those with forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1)/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.ResultsAirflow 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.ConclusionsSimple 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 exp