[慢性阻塞性肺病(COPD)长效三联疗法的实际应用:ELETHON医生调查]。

IF 1.2 Q4 RESPIRATORY SYSTEM
Pneumologie Pub Date : 2024-10-22 DOI:10.1055/a-2414-4197
Kai-Michael Beeh, Saskia Krüger
{"title":"[慢性阻塞性肺病(COPD)长效三联疗法的实际应用:ELETHON医生调查]。","authors":"Kai-Michael Beeh, Saskia Krüger","doi":"10.1055/a-2414-4197","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Gaps in optimal COPD management have been identified in clinical practice, with discrepancies between guideline recommendations and routine care. The reasons for such discrepancies are incompletely understood. The ELETHON survey aimed to identify physicians' attitudes towards general concepts of COPD management and, in particular, initiation of inhaled triple therapies.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>ELETHON was a nationwide cross-sectional survey with general practitioners (GP) and pulmonary specialists (PS) working in the ambulatory outpatient setting in Germany, using a structured 17-item questionnaire (single or multiple choice questions) addressing the topics of secondary prevention, exacerbation detection, strategies for therapy escalation, choice of inhaled triple therapies and evaluation of treatment benefits.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Questionnaires filled by n=2028 GPs and n=371 PS were analyzed. In both groups, secondary prevention was deemed important in COPD care (GP/PS 76.4%/90.6%), with inhalation technique, vaccination status, and appropriate inhaled pharmacotherapy as key components. Activity/rehabilitation was rarely mentioned by GPs (48.3% vs. 84.5%). Exacerbations and symptomatic worsening were the main triggers for therapy escalation, but were not recorded in a structured way. \"Hospitalization\" and \"≥2 ambulatory exacerbations\" were mentioned most frequently as thresholds. Neither GPs nor PS measured eosinophils in the majority of patients. Fixed triple combinations were preferred, with availability of different treatment steps in the same device as important decision aid. Treatment success was evaluated by exacerbations, quality of life, symptoms, lung function and rescue medication use, while COPD Assessment Test (CAT) score was rarely used by GPs and PS.</p><p><strong>Discussion and conclusion: </strong>The ELETHON survey identified gaps in COPD management in Germany. While secondary prevention is deemed important, escalation of inhaled therapy is undertaken rather late, the reported importance of vaccinations does not match current quota in German COPD patients, and non-pharmacological measures are often unused. Exacerbation and symptom documentation is rather subjective, validated questionnaires and blood eosinophils are of minor relevance. These results provide evidence of barriers and hidden potentials towards optimization of routine ambulatory care for COPD patients in Germany.</p>","PeriodicalId":20197,"journal":{"name":"Pneumologie","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"[Use of long-acting triple therapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in practice: The ELETHON physicians' survey].\",\"authors\":\"Kai-Michael Beeh, Saskia Krüger\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/a-2414-4197\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Gaps in optimal COPD management have been identified in clinical practice, with discrepancies between guideline recommendations and routine care. The reasons for such discrepancies are incompletely understood. The ELETHON survey aimed to identify physicians' attitudes towards general concepts of COPD management and, in particular, initiation of inhaled triple therapies.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>ELETHON was a nationwide cross-sectional survey with general practitioners (GP) and pulmonary specialists (PS) working in the ambulatory outpatient setting in Germany, using a structured 17-item questionnaire (single or multiple choice questions) addressing the topics of secondary prevention, exacerbation detection, strategies for therapy escalation, choice of inhaled triple therapies and evaluation of treatment benefits.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Questionnaires filled by n=2028 GPs and n=371 PS were analyzed. In both groups, secondary prevention was deemed important in COPD care (GP/PS 76.4%/90.6%), with inhalation technique, vaccination status, and appropriate inhaled pharmacotherapy as key components. Activity/rehabilitation was rarely mentioned by GPs (48.3% vs. 84.5%). Exacerbations and symptomatic worsening were the main triggers for therapy escalation, but were not recorded in a structured way. \\\"Hospitalization\\\" and \\\"≥2 ambulatory exacerbations\\\" were mentioned most frequently as thresholds. Neither GPs nor PS measured eosinophils in the majority of patients. Fixed triple combinations were preferred, with availability of different treatment steps in the same device as important decision aid. Treatment success was evaluated by exacerbations, quality of life, symptoms, lung function and rescue medication use, while COPD Assessment Test (CAT) score was rarely used by GPs and PS.</p><p><strong>Discussion and conclusion: </strong>The ELETHON survey identified gaps in COPD management in Germany. While secondary prevention is deemed important, escalation of inhaled therapy is undertaken rather late, the reported importance of vaccinations does not match current quota in German COPD patients, and non-pharmacological measures are often unused. Exacerbation and symptom documentation is rather subjective, validated questionnaires and blood eosinophils are of minor relevance. These results provide evidence of barriers and hidden potentials towards optimization of routine ambulatory care for COPD patients in Germany.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20197,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pneumologie\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pneumologie\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2414-4197\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pneumologie","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2414-4197","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:临床实践中已发现慢性阻塞性肺疾病的最佳治疗存在差距,指南建议与常规治疗之间存在差异。造成这种差异的原因尚不完全清楚。ELETHON调查旨在确定医生对慢性阻塞性肺病管理的一般概念,尤其是对吸入性三联疗法启动的态度:ELETHON是一项全国范围的横断面调查,调查对象为在德国非住院门诊工作的全科医生(GP)和肺病专家(PS),采用结构化的17项问卷(单项或多项选择题),涉及二级预防、病情加重检测、治疗升级策略、吸入式三联疗法的选择以及治疗效果评估等主题:对 2028 名全科医生和 371 名普通医生填写的问卷进行了分析。在这两组人中,二级预防都被认为是慢性阻塞性肺病护理的重要内容(全科医生/普通医生分别为 76.4%/90.6%),其中吸入技术、疫苗接种情况和适当的吸入药物治疗是关键要素。活动/康复很少被全科医生提及(48.3% 对 84.5%)。病情加重和症状恶化是治疗升级的主要触发因素,但没有以结构化的方式进行记录。最常提及的阈值是 "住院 "和"≥2 次非住院加重"。全科医生和 PS 均未对大多数患者的嗜酸性粒细胞进行测量。固定的三联疗法组合是首选,同一设备中不同治疗步骤的可用性是重要的决策辅助工具。治疗成功与否通过病情恶化、生活质量、症状、肺功能和抢救用药进行评估,而全科医生和专科医生很少使用慢性阻塞性肺病评估测试(CAT)评分:ELETHON调查发现了德国在慢性阻塞性肺病管理方面存在的不足。虽然二级预防被认为很重要,但吸入疗法的升级却进行得很晚,接种疫苗的重要性与德国慢性阻塞性肺病患者目前的接种配额不符,非药物治疗措施往往未被使用。病情加重和症状记录相当主观,有效的问卷调查和血液嗜酸性粒细胞与病情关系不大。这些结果为优化德国慢性阻塞性肺病患者的常规门诊治疗提供了障碍和隐藏潜力的证据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
[Use of long-acting triple therapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in practice: The ELETHON physicians' survey].

Background: Gaps in optimal COPD management have been identified in clinical practice, with discrepancies between guideline recommendations and routine care. The reasons for such discrepancies are incompletely understood. The ELETHON survey aimed to identify physicians' attitudes towards general concepts of COPD management and, in particular, initiation of inhaled triple therapies.

Method: ELETHON was a nationwide cross-sectional survey with general practitioners (GP) and pulmonary specialists (PS) working in the ambulatory outpatient setting in Germany, using a structured 17-item questionnaire (single or multiple choice questions) addressing the topics of secondary prevention, exacerbation detection, strategies for therapy escalation, choice of inhaled triple therapies and evaluation of treatment benefits.

Results: Questionnaires filled by n=2028 GPs and n=371 PS were analyzed. In both groups, secondary prevention was deemed important in COPD care (GP/PS 76.4%/90.6%), with inhalation technique, vaccination status, and appropriate inhaled pharmacotherapy as key components. Activity/rehabilitation was rarely mentioned by GPs (48.3% vs. 84.5%). Exacerbations and symptomatic worsening were the main triggers for therapy escalation, but were not recorded in a structured way. "Hospitalization" and "≥2 ambulatory exacerbations" were mentioned most frequently as thresholds. Neither GPs nor PS measured eosinophils in the majority of patients. Fixed triple combinations were preferred, with availability of different treatment steps in the same device as important decision aid. Treatment success was evaluated by exacerbations, quality of life, symptoms, lung function and rescue medication use, while COPD Assessment Test (CAT) score was rarely used by GPs and PS.

Discussion and conclusion: The ELETHON survey identified gaps in COPD management in Germany. While secondary prevention is deemed important, escalation of inhaled therapy is undertaken rather late, the reported importance of vaccinations does not match current quota in German COPD patients, and non-pharmacological measures are often unused. Exacerbation and symptom documentation is rather subjective, validated questionnaires and blood eosinophils are of minor relevance. These results provide evidence of barriers and hidden potentials towards optimization of routine ambulatory care for COPD patients in Germany.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Pneumologie
Pneumologie RESPIRATORY SYSTEM-
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
16.70%
发文量
416
期刊介绍: Organ der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Pneumologie DGP Organ des Deutschen Zentralkomitees zur Bekämpfung der Tuberkulose DZK Organ des Bundesverbandes der Pneumologen BdP Fachärzte für Lungen- und Bronchialheilkunde, Pneumologen und Allergologen
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信