Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Endotypes in Low- and Middle-Income Country Settings: Precision Medicine for All.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Siddharthan T
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7365372 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:ImportanceMost of the global morbidity and mortality in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) occurs in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), with significant economic effects.ObjectiveTo assess the discriminative accuracy of 3 instruments using questionnaires and peak expiratory flow (PEF) to screen for COPD in 3 LMIC settings.Design, setting, and participantsA cross-sectional analysis of discriminative accuracy, conducted between January 2018 and March 2020 in semiurban Bhaktapur, Nepal; urban Lima, Peru; and rural Nakaseke, Uganda, using a random age- and sex-stratified sample of the population 40 years or older.ExposuresThree screening tools, the COPD Assessment in Primary Care to Identify Undiagnosed Respiratory Disease and Exacerbation Risk (CAPTURE; range, 0-6; high risk indicated by a score of 5 or more or score 2-5 with low PEF [<250 L/min for females and <350 L/min for males]), the COPD in LMICs Assessment questionnaire (COLA-6; range, 0-5; high risk indicated by a score of 4 or more), and the Lung Function Questionnaire (LFQ; range, 0-25; high risk indicated by a score of 18 or less) were assessed against a reference standard diagnosis of COPD using quality-assured postbronchodilator spirometry. CAPTURE and COLA-6 include a measure of PEF.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was discriminative accuracy of the tools in identifying COPD as measured by area under receiver operating characteristic curves (AUCs) with 95% CIs. Secondary outcomes included sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value.ResultsAmong 10 709 adults who consented to participate in the study (mean age, 56.3 years (SD, 11.7); 50% female), 35% had ever smoked, and 30% were currently exposed to biomass smoke. The unweighted prevalence of COPD at the 3 sites was 18.2% (642/3534 participants) in Nepal, 2.7% (97/3550) in Peru, and 7.4% (264/3580) in Uganda. Among 1000 COPD cases, 49.3% had clinically important disease (Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease classification B-D), 16.4% had severe or very severe airflow obstruction (forced expiratory volume in 1 second <50% predicted), and 95.3% of cases were previously undiagnosed. The AUC for the screening instruments ranged from 0.717 (95% CI, 0.677-0.774) for LFQ in Peru to 0.791 (95% CI, 0.770-0.809) for COLA-6 in Nepal. The sensitivity ranged from 34.8% (95% CI, 25.3%-45.2%) for COLA-6 in Nepal to 64.2% (95% CI, 60.3%-67.9%) for CAPTURE in Nepal. The mean time to administer the instruments was 7.6 minutes (SD 1.11), and data completeness was 99.5%.Conclusions and relevanceThis study demonstrated that screening instruments for COPD were feasible to administer in 3 low- and middle-income settings. Further research is needed to assess instrument performance in other low- and middle-income settings and to determine whether implementation is associated with improved clinical outcomes.
| S-EPMC8753498 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPrior research has demonstrated that low- and low-middle-income countries (LLMICs) bear a higher burden of critical illness and have a higher rate of mortality from critical illness than high-income countries (HICs). There is a pressing need for improved critical care delivery in LLMICs to reduce this inequity. This systematic review aimed to characterise the range of critical care interventions and services delivered within LLMIC health care systems as reported in the literature.MethodsA search strategy using terms related to critical care in LLMICs was implemented in multiple databases. We included English language articles with human subjects describing at least one critical care intervention or service in an LLMIC setting published between 1 January 2008 and 1 January 2020.ResultsA total of 1620 studies met the inclusion criteria. Among the included studies, 45% of studies reported on pediatric patients, 43% on adults, 23% on infants, 8.9% on geriatric patients and 4.2% on maternal patients. Most of the care described (94%) was delivered in-hospital, with the remainder (6.2%) taking place in out-of-hospital care settings. Overall, 49% of critical care described was delivered outside of a designated intensive care unit. Specialist physicians delivered critical care in 60% of the included studies. Additional critical care was delivered by general physicians (40%), as well as specialist physician trainees (22%), pharmacists (16%), advanced nursing or midlevel practitioners (8.9%), ambulance providers (3.3%) and respiratory therapists (3.1%).ConclusionsThis review represents a comprehensive synthesis of critical care delivery in LLMIC settings. Approximately 50% of critical care interventions and services were delivered outside of a designated intensive care unit. Specialist physicians were the most common health care professionals involved in care delivery in the included studies, however generalist physicians were commonly reported to provide critical care interventions and services. This study additionally characterised the quality of the published evidence guiding critical care practice in LLMICs, demonstrating a paucity of interventional and cost-effectiveness studies. Future research is needed to understand better how to optimise critical care interventions, services, care delivery and costs in these settings.RegistrationPROSPERO CRD42019146802.
| S-EPMC10691174 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionSubstance use disorder (SUD) and problematic substance use are global public health concerns with significant multifaceted implications for physical health and psychosocial well-being. The impact of SUD extends beyond the individual to their family while imposing financial and social burdens on the community. Though family-centred interventions have shown promise in addressing SUD, their implementation and impact in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) remain underexplored.Methods and analysisPer Joanna Briggs Institute's scoping review protocol, a systematic search strategy was employed across OVID Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, Web of Science-Core Collection, Global Health and CINAHL from 22 February 2024 to 26 February 2024, to identify relevant studies focused on family-centred interventions for SUD in LMIC, devoid of publication time and language constraints. Two independent reviewers will screen the titles, abstracts and full texts, with discrepancies resolved through discussion or third-party reviews. The extracted data charted in a structured form will be visualised by diagrams or tables, focusing on the feasibility and impact of family-centred interventions for SUD in LMIC. For qualitative studies, the findings will be synthesised and presented in thematic clusters, and for studies that report quantitative outcomes, specific health, including SUD and psychosocial, outcomes will be synthesised, aligning with the Population, Concept and Context framework.Ethics and disseminationThese data on substance use, psychosocial outcomes and perspectives of individuals with SUD and their families will be presented in narrative format, highlighting patterns and identifying research gaps. This review aims to synthesise the existing evidence on family-centred interventions for improving substance use and/or psychosocial outcomes in individuals with SUD in LMIC and seeks to inform future policy and practice. Ethics approval is not required for this scoping review, and modifications to the review protocol will be disclosed. Findings will be disseminated through conference proceedings and peer-reviewed publication.
| S-EPMC11367307 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn low-and-middle income countries (LMICs), accurate measures of the elements of quality care provided by a health worker through family planning services (also known as process quality) are required to ensure family's contraceptives needs are being met. There are many tools used to assess family planning process quality of care (QoC) but no one standardized method. Those measuring QoC in LMICs should select an appropriate tool based the program context and financial/logistical parameters, but they require data on how well each tool measures routine clinical care. We aim to synthesize the literature on validity/comparability of family planning process QoC measurement tools through a quantitative systematic review with no meta-analysis.MethodsWe searched six literature databases for studies that compared quality measurements from different tools using quantitative statistics such as sensitivity/specificity, kappa statistic or absolute difference. We extracted the comparative measure along with other relevant study information, organized by quality indicator domain (e.g. counseling and privacy), and then classified the measure by low, medium, and high agreement.ResultsWe screened 8172 articles and identified eight for analysis. Studies comparing quality measurements from simulated clients, direct observation, client exit interview, provider knowledge quizzes, and medical record review were included. These eight studies were heterogenous in their methods and the measurements compared. There was insufficient data to estimate overall summary measures of validity for the tools. Client exit interviews compared to direct observation or simulated client protocols had the most data and they were a poor proxy of the actual quality care received for many measurements.ConclusionTo measure QoC consistently and accurately in LMICs, standardized tools and measures are needed along with an established method of combining them for a comprehensive picture of quality care. Data on how different tools proxy quality client care will inform these guidelines. Despite the small number of studies found during the review, we described important differences on how tools measure quality of care.
| S-EPMC8557007 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Rationale: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a prevalent and burdensome condition in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Challenges to better care include more effective diagnosis and access to affordable interventions. There are no previous reports describing therapeutic needs of populations with COPD in LMICs who were identified through screening. Objectives: To describe unmet therapeutic need in screening-detected COPD in LMIC settings. Methods: We compared interventions recommended by the international Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease COPD strategy document, with that received in 1,000 people with COPD identified by population screening at three LMIC sites in Nepal, Peru, and Uganda. We calculated costs using data on the availability and affordability of medicines. Measurement and Main Results: The greatest unmet need for nonpharmacological interventions was for education and vaccinations (applicable to all), pulmonary rehabilitation (49%), smoking cessation (30%), and advice on biomass smoke exposure (26%). Ninety-five percent of the cases were previously undiagnosed, and few were receiving therapy (4.5% had short-acting β-agonists). Only three of 47 people (6%) with a previous COPD diagnosis had access to drugs consistent with recommendations. None of those with more severe COPD were accessing appropriate maintenance inhalers. Even when available, maintenance treatments were unaffordable, with 30 days of treatment costing more than a low-skilled worker's daily average wage. Conclusions: We found a significant missed opportunity to reduce the burden of COPD in LMIC settings, with most cases undiagnosed. Although there is unmet need in developing novel therapies, in LMICs where the burden is greatest, better diagnosis combined with access to affordable interventions could translate to immediate benefit.
| S-EPMC10449073 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionIn the last decade, survival of people living with HIV (PLHIV) has dramatically increased due wide availability of effective antiretroviral therapy. However, PLHIV remain at a comparatively higher risk of non-communicable comorbidities. We sought to determine the burden of COPD and its associations in an urban tertiary HIV clinic in Uganda.Methods and findingsHIV-infected adults attending the Makerere University Joint AIDS program; aged ≥30 years without acute ailments were screened for COPD using study questionnaires and spirometry (post-bronchodilator FEV1/FVC<0.7). We determined its prevalence and association with demographic characteristics, body mass index (BMI) and known risk factors. Of 288 participants enrolled, 177 (61%) were female; 253 (88%) were from urban residences, median age was 45 years (IQR: 39-51), 71(25%) were 'ever' smokers, 284(99%) reported biomass fuel use and 72(25%) had a history of tuberculosis. All except 1 participant were on antiretroviral therapy, median current CD4 (cells/mm3) was 558 (IQR 402-753) and 275(96%) were virologically suppressed. Nearly half (130/288, 45%) had recurrent respiratory symptoms. The prevalence of COPD was 3.1% (9/288) [95% CI: 1.63-5.92]. COPD was associated with: previous tuberculosis, (adjusted odds ratio (AOR): 6.36, [95% CI 1.64-35.84], P = 0.036), self-reported chronic shortness of breath (AOR: 9.06, [95% CI 1.34-61.10], P = 0.024) and a BMI <21 Kg/m2 (AOR: 10.42 [95% CI: 1.61-100.00], P = 0.013).ConclusionIn this HIV population, COPD prevalence was low and was associated with previous tuberculosis, self-reported chronic shortness of breath and BMI <21 Kg/m2.
| S-EPMC8362990 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMigration among skilled labour has been noted as one of the major issues in recent times, especially among health workers. Data from the United Nations show that almost two thirds of people migrating are labor migrants and international migrants constitute 3.5% of the global migration population. Out of the millions of people who migrate across the globe, health workers, especially nurses form a greater portion of these numbers. This study explored nursing students' intention to migrate to other countries after completing their programs.MethodA descriptive cross-sectional design approach was adopted using self-administered questionnaire that contain aspects of open-ended questions. A sample size of 226 nursing students were recruited using convenient sampling technique.ResultsThe results overall, revealed that 226 nursing students participated in the study. Out of this, most of the respondents 42.5% were aged between 25 and 30 years with majority 53.1% being males. Also, 35% of the participants were married with more than half 59.7% of the respondents being Christians. The results further revealed that most of the participants 64.2% had intention of migrating to other countries. Among those who intended to migrate, 11.7% identified lack of jobs, 39.3% identified low salaries in Ghana while 50.3% identified bad working conditions. The rest 2.8% attributed their intentions to migrate to educational opportunities. Common places of destination included Canada, USA, UK and Australia.ConclusionThe outcome of this study points to the urgent need for low-income countries such as Ghana to urgently put in measures to curb the menace of brain drain among nurses. Improvement in working condition of nurses must be prioritized to motivate their stay.
| S-EPMC11256540 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Asthma-chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) overlap (ACO) represents the confluence of bronchial airway hyperreactivity and chronic airflow limitation and has been described as leading to worse lung function and quality of life than found with either singular disease process. OBJECTIVE:We aimed to describe the prevalence and risk factors for ACO among adults across 6 low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). METHODS:We compiled cross-sectional data for 11,923 participants aged 35 to 92 years from 4 population-based studies in 12 settings. We defined COPD as postbronchodilator FEV1/forced vital capacity ratio below the lower limit of normal, asthma as wheeze or medication use in 12 months or self-reported physician diagnosis, and ACO as having both. RESULTS:The prevalence of ACO was 3.8% (0% in rural Puno, Peru, to 7.8% in Matlab, Bangladesh). The odds of having ACO were higher with household exposure to biomass fuel smoke (odds ratio [OR], 1.48; 95% CI, 0.98-2.23), smoking tobacco (OR, 1.28 per 10 pack-years; 95% CI, 1.22-1.34), and having primary or less education (OR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.07-1.70) as compared to nonobstructed nonasthma individuals. ACO was associated with severe obstruction (FEV1 %, <50; 31.6% of ACO vs 10.9% of COPD alone) and severe spirometric deficits compared with participants with asthma (-1.61 z scores FEV1; 95% CI, -1.48 to -1.75) or COPD alone (-0.94 z scores; 95% CI, -0.78 to -1.10). CONCLUSIONS:ACO may be as prevalent and more severe in LMICs than has been reported in high-income settings. Exposure to biomass fuel smoke may be an overlooked risk factor, and we favor diagnostic criteria for ACO that include environmental exposures common to LMICs.
| S-EPMC7079232 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Objectives: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) disproportionately affects low- and middle-income countries. Health systems are ill prepared to manage the increase in COPD cases. Methods: We performed a pilot effectiveness-implementation randomized field trial of a community health worker (CHW)-supported, 1-year self-management intervention in individuals with COPD grades B-D. The study took place in low-resource settings of Nepal, Peru, and Uganda. The primary outcome was the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) score at 1 year. We evaluated differences in moderate to severe exacerbations, all-cause hospitalizations, and the EuroQol score (EQ-5D-3 L) at 12 months. Measurements and Main Results: We randomly assigned 239 participants (119 control arm, 120 intervention arm) with grades B-D COPD to a multicomponent, CHW-supported intervention or standard of care and COPD education. Twenty-five participants (21%) died or were lost to follow-up in the control arm compared with 11 (9%) in the intervention arm. At 12 months, there was no difference in mean total SGRQ score between the intervention and control arms (34.7 vs. 34.0 points; adjusted mean difference, 1.0; 95% confidence interval, -4.2, 6.1; P = 0.71). The intervention arm had a higher proportion of hospitalizations than the control arm (10% vs. 5.2%; adjusted odds ratio, 2.2; 95% confidence interval, 0.8, 7.5; P = 0.15) at 12 months. Conclusions: A CHW-based intervention to support self-management of acute exacerbations of COPD in three resource-poor settings did not result in differences in SGRQ scores at 1 year. Fidelity was high, and intervention engagement was moderate. Although these results cannot differentiate between a failed intervention or implementation, they nonetheless suggest that we need to revisit our strategy. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03359915).
| S-EPMC10867931 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesThere is growing recognition around the importance of multimorbidity in low-income and middle-income country (LMIC) settings, and specifically the need for pragmatic intervention studies to reduce the risk of developing multimorbidity, and of mitigating the complications and progression of multimorbidity in LMICs. One of many challenges in completing such research has been the selection of appropriate outcomes measures. A 2018 Delphi exercise to develop a core-outcome set for multimorbidity research did not specifically address the challenges of multimorbidity in LMICs where the global burden is greatest, patterns of disease often differ and health systems are frequently fragmented. We, therefore, aimed to summarise and critically review outcome measures suitable for studies investigating mitigation of multimorbidity in LMIC settings.SettingLMIC.ParticipantsPeople with multimorbidity.Outcome measuresIdentification of all outcome measures.ResultsWe present a critical review of outcome measures across eight domains: mortality, quality of life, function, health economics, healthcare access and utilisation, treatment burden, measures of 'Healthy Living' and self-efficacy and social functioning.ConclusionsStudies in multimorbidity are necessarily diverse and thus different outcome measures will be appropriate for different study designs. Presenting the diversity of outcome measures across domains should provide a useful summary for researchers, encourage the use of multiple domains in multimorbidity research, and provoke debate and progress in the field.
| S-EPMC7478040 | biostudies-literature