Annals of Thoracic Medicine Official publication of the Saudi Thoracic Society, affiliated to King Saud University
 
Search Ahead of print Current Issue Archives Instructions Subscribe e-Alerts Login 
Home Email this article link Print this article Bookmark this page Decrease font size Default font size Increase font size
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2013  |  Volume : 8  |  Issue : 4  |  Page : 197-203

Differences in care between general medicine and respiratory specialists in the management of patients hospitalized for acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease


1 Department of Respiratory Medicine, Gold Coast Hospital, Southport, Australia
2 Department of Respiratory Medicine, Gold Coast Hospital; Department of Respiratory Medicine, School of Medicine, Griffith University, Southport, Australia

Correspondence Address:
Krishna B Sriram
Department of Respiratory Medicine, Gold Coast Hospital, 108 Nerang Street, Southport, QLD, 4215
Australia
Login to access the Email id


DOI: 10.4103/1817-1737.118499

PMID: 24250732

Rights and Permissions

Context: Hospitalized patients with acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) may be managed by either respiratory specialists (RS) or general medicine physicians (GMP). While previous studies have audited the hospital AECOPD management of RS, only a small number of studies have evaluated the management of GMP. Aims: The aims of this study were to firstly examine the differences in AECOPD management of GMP and RS and secondly compare their care to national COPD guidelines. Methods: A retrospective review was undertaken of consecutive AECOPD patients admitted to two hospitals (one hospital where all AECOPD patients were managed by RS and another where all AECOPD patients were managed by GMP) over a 3-month period. Electronic medical records, medical case notes, pathology and radiology data for the admission were reviewed. Results: There were 201 COPD exacerbations in 169 patients (49.7% male, mean age 72.3). GMP managed 84 (41.7%) exacerbations. In comparison to RS, GMP performed fewer spirometry tests, blood gas analysis and less frequently treated patients with guideline-recommended medications. Referral to pulmonary rehabilitation was poor for both groups of clinicians. Median length of stay was shorter in GMP patients versus RS patients (3 days vs. 5 days, P = 0.001). There were no differences in the 12-month re-admission (41.7% vs. 38.5%, P = 0.664) and mortality rates (10.7% vs. 6%, P = 0.292) between both groups of patients. Conclusion: Our study found differences in the hospital AECOPD management of GMP and RS, but these did not translate into different clinical outcomes between their patients. We also found suboptimal adherence to national COPD guidelines, suggesting that there is scope for improvement in the AECOPD management of both groups of clinicians.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed3036    
    Printed117    
    Emailed1    
    PDF Downloaded564    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 3    

Recommend this journal