Chest ACCP Member Benefits
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Guest Access | Sign In via User Name/Password
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Free
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Free
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Article Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Bohadana, A.
Right arrow Articles by Martinet, Y.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Bohadana, A.
Right arrow Articles by Martinet, Y.
(Chest. 2005;128:1252-1257.)
© 2005 American College of Chest Physicians

Detecting Airflow Obstruction in Smoking Cessation Trials*

A Rationale for Routine Spirometry

Abraham Bohadana, MD; Fredrik Nilsson, MSc and Yves Martinet, MD, PhD

* From INSERM ESPRI EP2R (Dr. Bohadana), Vandoeuvre-lès-Nancy, France; Service de Pneumologie (Dr. Martinet), EA 3443, CHU de Nancy, Nancy, France; and Pfizer Consumer Healthcare (Mr. Nilsson), Clinical Research, Helsingborg, Sweden.

Correspondence to: Abraham B. Bohadana, MD, INSERM, ESPRI EP2R, Faculté de Médecine, B.P. 184 - 9, Av de la Forêt de Haye, 54505 Vandoeuvre-lès-Nancy, France; e-mail: bohadana{at}u420.nancy.inserm.fr

Background: Spirometry is not routinely performed in smoking cessation trials. Smokers with airflow obstruction who are unavailable for follow-up incur the risk of accelerated loss in lung function. We evaluated the prevalence of airflow obstruction among smokers enrolled in smoking cessation trials and the proportion of subjects with obstruction unavailable for follow-up.

Design, setting, and participants: The study was performed in a university research laboratory; 598 smokers participating in two smoking cessation trials were included. All subjects underwent spirometry at entry and after 1 year of follow-up. All received nicotine replacement therapy. At completion, they were classified into quitters, reducers, or continuing smokers.

Measurements and results: At enrollment, spirometry findings were normal in 493 subjects (82.4%). Airway obstruction (FEV1 < 80% predicted) was found in 105 subjects (17.6%): mild obstruction (FEV1 70 to 80% predicted) in 75 subjects, moderate obstruction (FEV1 50 to 69% predicted) in 22 subjects, and severe obstruction (FEV1 < 50% predicted) in 8 subjects. From these subjects, 75 were unavailable for follow-up: airflow obstruction was mild in 52 subjects (69.3%), moderate in 17 subjects (22.7%), and severe in 6 subjects (8%).

Conclusions: Spirometry detected a high prevalence yield of airflow obstruction in participants in smoking cessation trials. Most subjects with airflow obstruction were unavailable for follow-up; they would have remained unaware of their condition if not for spirometry. Smokers with airflow obstruction should be identified and advised to seek further care.

Key Words: airflow obstruction • FEV1 • smokers • smoking cessation • spirometry






HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2005 by the American College of Chest Physicians.