This information is for reference purposes only. It was current when produced and may now be outdated. Archive material is no longer maintained, and some links may not work. Persons with disabilities having difficulty accessing this information should contact us at: https://info.ahrq.gov. Let us know the nature of the problem, the Web address of what you want, and your contact information.
Please go to www.ahrq.gov for current information.
Full Title: Use of Spirometry for Case Finding, Diagnosis, and Management of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD)
View or download Summary/Report
Objectives: To conduct a systematic review to determine:
- The prevalence of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) and airflow obstruction.
- If spirometry improves smoking cessation.
- If effectiveness of COPD therapies varies based on baseline or change in spirometric severity.
- Whether spirometry provides independent prognostic value related to pulmonary outcomes.
Data Sources: Articles published in English from 1966 to May 2005 were identified by searching MEDLINE® and the Cochrane Database. Children and individuals with asthma or alpha-1 antitrypsin disease were excluded. Ten cohort studies were included for prevalence; seven randomized clinical trials (RCTs) for smoking cessation; 53 RCTs and six meta-analyses for therapies; and five cohort studies for prognosis.
Review Methods: Study and patient characteristics and outcomes were abstracted. Main outcomes according to age, race, gender, and spirometric, smoking, or symptom status by question were:
- Prevalence of airflow obstruction and clinical diagnosis of COPD.
- Smoking abstinence rates.
- Exacerbation rates, hospitalizations, mortality and respiratory health status.
- Spirometry as an independent predictor of future COPD stage and symptoms.
Results: Prevalence and severity of airflow obstruction, respiratory symptoms, and clinical diagnosis of COPD vary according to definition, country, and populations. Applying recent diagnostic criteria to a nationally representative U.S. survey, 7.2 percent were categorized as "at risk," 7.2 percent had mild airflow obstruction, 5.4 percent had moderate obstruction, and 1.5 percent had severe to very severe airflow obstruction. Airflow obstruction prevalence was higher in current or past smokers and older individuals.
Evidence regarding the effect of spirometry on smoking cessation was limited and flawed. Data indicate that spirometry is of limited use in predicting a patient's future likelihood of quitting.
Spirometry is useful in adults with bothersome respiratory symptoms for determining at what threshold of airflow obstruction initiation of therapy is likely to be beneficial. COPD treatment trials evaluated inhaled medications, pulmonary rehabilitation, disease management, supplemental oxygen, or surgery. Most were less than 1 year in duration and involved subjects with severe to very-severe airflow obstruction and frequent COPD exacerbations. Treatments reduced the percentage of subjects having one or more exacerbations by an absolute reduction of 5-6 percent but did not reduce mortality (except for oxygen in a small subset of individuals). The average magnitude of improvement for respiratory and dyspnea functional status measures was less than considered clinically significant though some subjects may notice considerable improvement.
Five large studies of greater than 1 year duration found little to no improvement in symptoms with inhaled medications among subjects with mild to moderate airflow obstruction, many of whom had respiratory symptoms and were detected based on spirometry. We estimated that the costs of routine spirometry of all adult smokers, ex-smokers, and non-smokers with any respiratory symptom would exceed $1 billion. Based on the prevalence of respiratory symptoms, levels of airflow obstruction identified in the U.S., and the effectiveness of drug therapy, we estimated that such a strategy applied to a clinic population of 10,000 adults would identify 6,588 for spirometric testing, detect 129 (1.3 percent) who would be candidates for COPD therapy, and result in 8 who would benefit from reduction in exacerbations. On average, respiratory status measures and survival would not be improved.
Conclusions: Spirometry, in addition to clinical examination, improves COPD diagnostic accuracy compared to clinical examination alone and it is a useful diagnostic tool in individuals with symptoms suggestive of possible COPD. The primary benefit of spirometry is to identify individuals who might benefit from pharmacologic treatment in order to improve exacerbations. These include adults with symptomatic, severe to very severe airflow obstruction.
Spirometry for case finding among all adults with persistent respiratory symptoms or those with a history of exposure to pulmonary risk factors as well as for monitoring individuals or adjusting treatment is unlikely to be beneficial unless future studies establish that spirometry improves smoking cessation rates, treatments other than smoking cessation benefit individuals with airflow obstruction who do not report respiratory symptoms, or that relative effectiveness between therapies varies according to an individual's baseline or followup spirometry. Widespread spirometric testing is likely to label a large number of individuals (many who do not report respiratory symptoms) with disease and result in considerable testing and treatment costs and health-care resource utilization.
Use of Spirometry for Case Finding, Diagnosis, and Management of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD)
Evidence-based Practice Center: Minnesota
Topic Nominators: American Thoracic Society, American Academy of Family Practitioners, American College of Physicians, and the American Association of Pediatrics
Current as of August 2005