Factors associated with relapse after ambulatory treatment of acute exacerbations of chronic bronchitis

Le résumé fourni par la source

This study aimed to identify the risk factors for relapse after ambulatory treatment of acute exacerbations of chronic bronchitis (AECB) that can easily be used in a primary care setting. Data were prospectively collected on 2,414 ambulatory patients with AECB from 268 general practices located throughout Spain. A multivariate model to identify risk factors independently associated with failures was developed and validated from the information recorded at the inclusion visit and at 30-days follow-up visit. A total of 507 patients relapsed (21%); of these, 84 required admission (16.5%). The multivariate model for prediction of the risk of relapse included 2,414 cases: 1,689 for the developmental sample and 725 in the validation sample. The model obtained contained three readily-obtainable variables: ischaemic heart disease (odds ratio (OR)=1.63; 95% confidence interval (CI)=1.07-2.47), degree of dyspnoea (OR = 1.31; 1.14-1.50) and number of visits to the general practitioner the previous year (OR = 1.07; 1.04-1.10). The model calibrated well in developmental and validation samples (goodness-of-fit tests: p = 0.295 and p = 0.637, respectively). Severity of the exacerbation was not associated with increased risk of relapse in either univariate or multivariate analysis. The present results suggest that baseline characteristics of the patients such as degree of dyspnoea, coexisting ischaemic heart disease and number of previous visits to the general practitioner for respiratory problems are strongly associated with increased risk of relapse after ambulatory treatment of acute exacerbations of chronic bronchitis. In contrast, exacerbation severity was not associated with clinical failure. Guidelines for management of acute exacerbations of chronic bronchitis should consider such risk factors and advocate intensive broad spectrum treatment and closer follow-up of patients exhibiting them.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.