Kang-Cheng Su , Yi-Han Hsiao , Hsin-Kuo Ko , Kun-Ta Chou , Tien-Hsin Jeng , Diahn-Warng Perng
{"title":"The Accuracy of PUMA Questionnaire in Combination With Peak Expiratory Flow Rate to Identify At-risk, Undiagnosed COPD Patients","authors":"Kang-Cheng Su , Yi-Han Hsiao , Hsin-Kuo Ko , Kun-Ta Chou , Tien-Hsin Jeng , Diahn-Warng Perng","doi":"10.1016/j.arbres.2024.06.013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>The English PUMA questionnaire emerges as an effective COPD case-finding tool. We aimed to use the PUMA questionnaire in combination with peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR) to improve case-finding efficacy in Chinese population.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>This cross-sectional, observational study included two stages: translating English to Chinese PUMA (C-PUMA) questionnaire with linguistic validation and psychometric evaluation, followed by clinical validation. Eligible participants (with age ≥40 years, respiratory symptoms, smoking history ≥10 pack-years) were enrolled and subjected to three questionnaires (C-PUMA, COPD assessment test [CAT], and generic health survey [SF-12V2]), PEFR measurement, and confirmatory spirometry. The C-PUMA score and PEFR were incorporated into a PUMA-PEFR prediction model applying binary logistic regression coefficients to estimate the probability of COPD (<em>P</em><sub>COPD</sub>).</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>C-PUMA was finalized through standard forward–backward translation processes and confirmation of good readability, comprehensibility, and reliability. In clinical validation, 240 participants completed the study. 78/240 (32.5%) were diagnosed with COPD. C-PUMA exhibited significant validity (correlated with CAT or physical component scores of SF-12V2, both <em>P</em> <!--><<!--> <!-->0.05, respectively). PUMA-PEFR model had higher diagnostic accuracy than C-PUMA alone (area under ROC curve, 0.893 <em>vs.</em> 0.749, <em>P</em> <!--><<!--> <!-->0.05). The best cutoff values of C-PUMA and PUMA-PEFR model (<em>P</em><sub>COPD</sub>) were ≥6 and ≥0.39, accounting for a sensitivity/specificity/numbers needed to screen of 77%/64%/3 and 79%/88%/2, respectively. C-PUMA ≥5 detected more underdiagnosed patients, up to 11.5% (<em>vs.</em> C-PUMA ≥6).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>C-PUMA is well-validated. The PUMA-PEFR model provides more accurate and cost-effective case-finding efficacy than C-PUMA alone in at-risk, undiagnosed COPD patients. These tools can be useful to detect COPD early.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":8339,"journal":{"name":"Archivos De Bronconeumologia","volume":"60 12","pages":"Pages 737-745"},"PeriodicalIF":8.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archivos De Bronconeumologia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0300289624002345","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction
The English PUMA questionnaire emerges as an effective COPD case-finding tool. We aimed to use the PUMA questionnaire in combination with peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR) to improve case-finding efficacy in Chinese population.
Methods
This cross-sectional, observational study included two stages: translating English to Chinese PUMA (C-PUMA) questionnaire with linguistic validation and psychometric evaluation, followed by clinical validation. Eligible participants (with age ≥40 years, respiratory symptoms, smoking history ≥10 pack-years) were enrolled and subjected to three questionnaires (C-PUMA, COPD assessment test [CAT], and generic health survey [SF-12V2]), PEFR measurement, and confirmatory spirometry. The C-PUMA score and PEFR were incorporated into a PUMA-PEFR prediction model applying binary logistic regression coefficients to estimate the probability of COPD (PCOPD).
Results
C-PUMA was finalized through standard forward–backward translation processes and confirmation of good readability, comprehensibility, and reliability. In clinical validation, 240 participants completed the study. 78/240 (32.5%) were diagnosed with COPD. C-PUMA exhibited significant validity (correlated with CAT or physical component scores of SF-12V2, both P < 0.05, respectively). PUMA-PEFR model had higher diagnostic accuracy than C-PUMA alone (area under ROC curve, 0.893 vs. 0.749, P < 0.05). The best cutoff values of C-PUMA and PUMA-PEFR model (PCOPD) were ≥6 and ≥0.39, accounting for a sensitivity/specificity/numbers needed to screen of 77%/64%/3 and 79%/88%/2, respectively. C-PUMA ≥5 detected more underdiagnosed patients, up to 11.5% (vs. C-PUMA ≥6).
Conclusion
C-PUMA is well-validated. The PUMA-PEFR model provides more accurate and cost-effective case-finding efficacy than C-PUMA alone in at-risk, undiagnosed COPD patients. These tools can be useful to detect COPD early.
期刊介绍:
Archivos de Bronconeumologia is a scientific journal that specializes in publishing prospective original research articles focusing on various aspects of respiratory diseases, including epidemiology, pathophysiology, clinical practice, surgery, and basic investigation. Additionally, the journal features other types of articles such as reviews, editorials, special articles of interest to the society and editorial board, scientific letters, letters to the editor, and clinical images. Published monthly, the journal comprises 12 regular issues along with occasional supplements containing articles from different sections.
All manuscripts submitted to the journal undergo rigorous evaluation by the editors and are subjected to expert peer review. The editorial team, led by the Editor and/or an Associate Editor, manages the peer-review process. Archivos de Bronconeumologia is published monthly in English, facilitating broad dissemination of the latest research findings in the field.