Title |
Inhaled treatment of COPD: a Delphi consensus statement
|
---|---|
Published in |
International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, March 2017
|
DOI | 10.2147/copd.s125564 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Vincent Ninane, Jean-Louis Corhay, Paul Germonpré, Wim Janssens, Guy F Joos, Giuseppe Liistro, Walter Vincken, Sandra Gurdain, Evelyne Vanvlasselaer, An Lehouck |
Abstract |
Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) global strategy (2015) provides guidance for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) with different first-choice options per GOLD category without specification. To evaluate the level of medical experts' consensus on their preferred first-choice treatment within different COPD categories. A two-round Delphi Panel consisting of 15 questions was completed by Belgian pulmonologists (n=31) and European (n=10) COPD experts. Good consensus was reached by both expert groups for long-acting bronchodilators instead of short-acting bronchodilators as first-choice treatment in GOLD A. Single bronchodilation with long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) was preferred over long-acting β2-agonist (LABA) and LABA/LAMA as first-choice treatment in GOLD B and GOLD C. For GOLD D patients based on the forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1)<50%, a very good consensus was reached for LAMA/LABA as first-choice treatment. For GOLD D patients based on frequent or severe exacerbations, there was a good consensus for LABA/LAMA/inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) as first choice in the Belgian group. According to the European experts, both LABA/LAMA and LABA/LAMA/ICS could be the first choice for these patients. Belgian and European experts recommend long-acting bronchodilators as first-choice treatment. Treatment containing ICS was found only appropriate in patients with FEV1<50% and ≥2 moderate exacerbations or 1 severe exacerbation/year. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Belgium | 1 | 50% |
Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 36 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Other | 6 | 17% |
Student > Bachelor | 5 | 14% |
Student > Master | 5 | 14% |
Researcher | 5 | 14% |
Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 11% |
Other | 5 | 14% |
Unknown | 6 | 17% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 18 | 50% |
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 4 | 11% |
Unspecified | 1 | 3% |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 3% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 3% |
Other | 2 | 6% |
Unknown | 9 | 25% |