↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Comparison of pulmonary function in patients with COPD, asthma-COPD overlap syndrome, and asthma with airflow limitation

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (65th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (59th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
44 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
55 Mendeley
Title
Comparison of pulmonary function in patients with COPD, asthma-COPD overlap syndrome, and asthma with airflow limitation
Published in
International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, May 2016
DOI 10.2147/copd.s105988
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yoshiaki Kitaguchi, Masanori Yasuo, Masayuki Hanaoka

Abstract

This study was conducted in order to investigate the differences in the respiratory physiology of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), asthma-COPD overlap syndrome (ACOS), and asthma with airflow limitation (asthma FL(+)). The medical records for a series of all stable patients with persistent airflow limitation due to COPD, ACOS, or asthma were retrospectively reviewed and divided into the COPD group (n=118), the ACOS group (n=32), and the asthma FL(+) group (n=27). All the patients underwent chest high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT) and pulmonary function tests, including respiratory impedance. The low attenuation area score on chest HRCT was significantly higher in the COPD group than in the ACOS group (9.52±0.76 vs 5.09±1.16, P<0.01). The prevalence of bronchial wall thickening on chest HRCT was significantly higher in the asthma FL(+) group than in the COPD group (55.6% vs 25.0%, P<0.01). In pulmonary function, forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) and peak expiratory flow rate were significantly higher in the asthma FL(+) group than in the ACOS group (76.28%±2.54% predicted vs 63.43%±3.22% predicted, P<0.05 and 74.40%±3.16% predicted vs 61.08%±3.54% predicted, P<0.05, respectively). Although residual volume was significantly lower in the asthma FL(+) group than in the COPD group (112.05%±4.34% predicted vs 137.38%±3.43% predicted, P<0.01) and the ACOS group (112.05%±4.34% predicted vs148.46%±6.25% predicted, P<0.01), there were no significant differences in functional residual capacity or total lung capacity. The increase in FEV1 in response to short-acting β2-agonists was significantly greater in the ACOS group than in the COPD group (229±29 mL vs 72±10 mL, P<0.01) and the asthma FL(+) group (229±29 mL vs 153±21 mL, P<0.05). Regarding respiratory impedance, resistance at 5 Hz and resistance at 20 Hz, which are oscillatory parameters of respiratory resistance, were significantly higher in the asthma FL(+) group than in the COPD group at the whole-breath (4.29±0.30 cmH2O/L/s vs 3.41±0.14 cmH2O/L/s, P<0.01 and 3.50±0.24 cmH2O/L/s vs 2.68±0.10 cmH2O/L/s, P<0.01, respectively), expiratory, and inspiratory phases. Although persistent airflow limitation occurs in patients with COPD, ACOS, and asthma FL(+), they may have distinct characteristics of the respiratory physiology and different responsiveness to bronchodilators.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 55 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 16%
Researcher 6 11%
Student > Bachelor 5 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 7%
Other 4 7%
Other 12 22%
Unknown 15 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 30 55%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Computer Science 1 2%
Sports and Recreations 1 2%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 17 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 21 July 2021.
All research outputs
#7,960,693
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
#959
of 2,577 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#104,846
of 311,862 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
#28
of 79 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
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 has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its peers.
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 311,862 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 79 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its contemporaries.