| Title |
Factors associated with the prescription of inhaled corticosteroids in GOLD group A and B patients with COPD – subgroup analysis of the Taiwan obstructive lung disease cohort
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, September 2015
|
| DOI | 10.2147/copd.s88114 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yu-Feng Wei, Ping-Hung Kuo, Ying-Huang Tsai, Chi-Wei Tao, Shih-Lung Cheng, Chao-Hsien Lee, Yao-Kuang Wu, Ning-Hung Chen, Wu-Huei Hsu, Jeng-Yuan Hsu, Ming-Shian Lin, Chin-Chou Wang |
| Abstract |
The overprescription of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in the current Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) group A and B patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is not uncommon in clinical practice. The aim of this study was to explore the factors associated with the use of ICS in these patients. The Taiwan obstructive lung disease (TOLD) study was a retrospective, observational nationwide survey of COPD patients conducted at 12 hospitals (n=1,096) in Taiwan. Multivariate logistic regression models were used to explore the predictors of ICS prescription in GOLD group A and B patients. Among the group A (n=179) and group B (n=398) patients, 198 (34.3%) were prescribed ICS (30.2% in group A and 36.2% in group B, respectively). The wheezing phenotype was present in 28.5% of group A and 34.2% of group B patients. Wheezing was the most significant factor for an ICS prescription in group A (odds ratio [OR], 2.33; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.14-4.75; P=0.020), group B (OR, 1.93; 95% CI, 1.24-2.99; P=0.004), and overall (OR, 2.04; 95% CI, 1.40-2.96; P<0.001). The COPD assessment test score was also associated with an ICS prescription in group B (OR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.00-1.07; P=0.038). About one-third of the GOLD group A and B patients with COPD in Taiwan are prescribed ICS. Our findings suggest that wheezing and COPD assessment test score are related to the prescription of ICS in these patients. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 6 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 5 | 83% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 17% |
| Researcher | 1 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 3 | 50% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 33% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 3 | 50% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 September 2015.
All research outputs
#16,048,009
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
#1,485
of 2,577 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#147,241
of 276,791 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
#57
of 85 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,577 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 276,791 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 85 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.