| 1. |
- Ekström, Magnus Pär, et al.
(författare)
-
The association of body mass index, weight gain and central obesity with activity-related breathlessness : the Swedish Cardiopulmonary Bioimage Study
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Thorax. - : BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. - 0040-6376 .- 1468-3296. ; 74:10, s. 958-964
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Introduction: Breathlessness is common in the population, especially in women and associated with adverse health outcomes. Obesity (body mass index (BMI) >30 kg/m(2)) is rapidly increasing globally and its impact on breathlessness is unclear.Methods: This population-based study aimed primarily to evaluate the association of current BMI and self-reported change in BMI since age 20 with breathlessness (modified Research Council score >= 1) in the middle-aged population. Secondary aims were to evaluate factors that contribute to breathlessness in obesity, including the interaction with spirometric lung volume and sex.Results: We included 13 437 individuals; mean age 57.5 years; 52.5% women; mean BMI 26.8 (SD 4.3); mean BMI increase since age 20 was 5.0 kg/m(2); and 1283 (9.6%) reported breathlessness. Obesity was strongly associated with increased breathlessness, OR 3.54 (95% CI, 3.03 to 4.13) independent of age, sex, smoking, airflow obstruction, exercise level and the presence of comorbidities. The association between BMI and breathlessness was modified by lung volume; the increase in breathlessness prevalence with higher BMI was steeper for individuals with lower forced vital capacity (FVC). The higher breathlessness prevalence in obese women than men (27.4% vs 12.5%; p<0.001) was related to their lower FVC. Irrespective of current BMI and confounders, individuals who had increased in BMI since age 20 had more breathlessness.Conclusion: Breathlessness is independently associated with obesity and with weight gain in adult life, and the association is stronger for individuals with lower lung volumes.
|
|
| 2. |
- Torén, Kjell, 1952, et al.
(författare)
-
Measures of bronchodilator response of FEV1, FVC and SVC in a Swedish general population sample aged 50-64 years, the SCAPIS Pilot Study
- 2017
-
Ingår i: International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. - : Informa UK Limited. - 1178-2005. ; 12, s. 973-980
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Data are lacking from general population studies on how to define changes in lung function after bronchodilation. This study aimed to analyze different measures of bronchodilator response of forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), forced vital capacity (FVC) and slow vital capacity (SVC). Materials and methods: Data were derived from the Swedish Cardiopulmonary Bioimage Study (SCAPIS) Pilot study. This analysis comprised 1,050 participants aged 50-64 years from the general population. Participants were investigated using a questionnaire, and FEV1, FVC and SVC were recorded before and 15 minutes after inhalation of 400 mu g of salbutamol. A bronchodilator response was defined as the relative change from baseline value expressed as the difference in units of percent predicted normal. Predictors of bronchodilator responses were assessed using multiple linear regression models. Airway obstruction was defined as FEV1/FVC ratio below lower limit of normal (LLN) before bronchodilation, and COPD was defined as an FEV1/FVC ratio below LLN after bronchodilation. Physician-diagnosed asthma was defined as an affirmative answer to " Have you ever had asthma diagnosed by a physician?". Asymptomatic never-smokers were defined as those not reporting physician-diagnosed asthma, physician-diagnosed COPD or emphysema, current wheeze or chronic bronchitis and being a lifelong never-smoker. Results: Among all subjects, the greatest bronchodilator responses (FEV1, FVC and SVC) were found in subjects with asthma or COPD. The upper 95th percentile of bronchodilator responses in asymptomatic never-smokers was 8.7% for FEV1, 4.2% for FVC and 5.0% for SVC. The bronchodilator responses were similar between men and women. In a multiple linear regression model comprising all asymptomatic never-smokers, the bronchodilator response of FEV1 was significantly associated with airway obstruction and height. Conclusion: When the bronchodilator response in asymptomatic never-smokers is reported as the difference in units of predicted normal, significant reversibility of FEV1, FVC and SVC to bronchodilators is 9%, 4% and 5%, respectively.
|
|
| 3. |
- Torén, Kjell, 1952, et al.
(författare)
-
Occupational exposure to vapor, gas, dust, or fumes and chronic airflow limitation, COPD, and emphysema: the Swedish CArdioPulmonary BioImage Study (SCAPIS pilot)
- 2017
-
Ingår i: International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. - : Informa UK Limited. - 1178-2005. ; 12, s. 3407-3413
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: The aim of this study was to estimate the occupational burden of airflow limitation, chronic airflow limitation, COPD, and emphysema. Materials and methods: Subjects aged 50-64 years (n=1,050) were investigated with forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) and forced vital capacity (FVC). Airflow limitation was defined as FEV1/FVC<0.7 before bronchodilation. Chronic airflow limitation was defined after bronchodilation either according to the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) as FEV1/FVC<0.7 or according to the lower limit of normal (LLN) approach as FEV1/FVC, LLN. COPD was defined as chronic airflow limitation (GOLD) in combination with dyspnea, wheezing, or chronic bronchitis. Emphysema was classified according to findings from computed tomography of the lungs. Occupational exposure was defined as self-reported occupational exposure to vapor, gas, dust, or fumes (VGDF). Odds ratios (OR) were calculated in models adjusted for age, gender, and smoking; population-attributable fractions and 95% CI were also calculated. Results: There were significant associations between occupational exposure to VGDF and COPD (OR 2.7, 95% CI 1.4-51), airflow limitation (OR 1.8, 95% CI 1.3-2.5), and emphysema (OR 1.8, 95% CI 1.1-3.1). The associations between occupational exposure to VGDF and chronic airflow limitation were weaker, and for the OR, the CIs included unity. The population-attributable fraction for occupational exposure to VGDF was 0.37 (95% CI 0.23-0.47) for COPD and 0.23 (95% CI 0.05-0.35) for emphysema. Conclusion: The occupational burden of COPD and computed tomography-verified emphysema is substantial.
|
|
| 4. |
- Torén, Kjell, 1952, et al.
(författare)
-
Validity of physician-diagnosed COPD in relation to spirometric definitions of COPD in a general population aged 50-64 years - the SCAPIS pilot study
- 2017
-
Ingår i: International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. - : Informa UK Limited. - 1178-2005. ; 12, s. 2269-2275
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: In epidemiological studies, items about physician-diagnosed COPD are often used. There is a lack of validation and standardization of these items. Materials and methods: In a general population-based study, 1,050 subjects completed a questionnaire and performed spirometry, including forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) and forced vital capacity (FVC) after inhalation of 400 mu g of salbutamol. COPD was defined as the ratio of FEV1/FVC < 0.7 after bronchodilation. Physician-diagnosed COPD was defined as an affirmative answer to the single item: "Have you ever had COPD diagnosed by a physician?", physician-diagnosed COPD/emphysema as an affirmative answer to any of the two single items; "Have you ever had COPD diagnosed by a physician?" or "Have you ever been told by a physician that you have emphysema?", physician-diagnosed chronic bronchitis as an affirmative answer to; "Have you ever been told by a physician that you have chronic bronchitis?" and physician-diagnosed COPD, emphysema or chronic bronchitis was defined as an affirmative answer to either of the three items above. Results: For the single item about physician-diagnosed COPD, the sensitivity was around 0.11 and the specificity was almost 0.99 in relation to COPD. The sensitivity of the combined items about COPD/emphysema in detecting COPD was 0.11 and the specificity was high, 0.985. When the items about physician-diagnosed COPD, emphysema or chronic bronchitis were merged as one entity, the sensitivity went up (0.13) and the specificity went down (0.95). Conclusion: Items about physician-diagnosed COPD have low sensitivity but a very high specificity, indicating that these items will minimize the proportion of false positives. The low sensitivity will underestimate the total burden of COPD in the general population. Items about physician-diagnosed COPD may be used in studies of risk factors for COPD, but are not recommended in prevalence studies.
|
|
| 5. |
- Torén, Kjell, 1952, et al.
(författare)
-
Vital capacity and COPD: the Swedish CArdioPulmonary bioImage Study (SCAPIS)
- 2016
-
Ingår i: International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. - : Informa UK Limited. - 1178-2005. ; 11:1, s. 927-933
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Spirometric diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is based on the ratio of forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1)/vital capacity (VC), either as a fixed value <0.7 or below the lower limit of normal (LLN). Forced vital capacity (FVC) is a proxy for VC. The first aim was to compare the use of FVC and VC, assessed as the highest value of FVC or slow vital capacity (SVC), when assessing the FEV1/VC ratio in a general population setting. The second aim was to evaluate the characteristics of subjects with COPD who obtained a higher SVC than FVC. Methods: Subjects (n=1,050) aged 50-64 years were investigated with FEV1, FVC, and SVC after bronchodilation. Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) COPDFVC was defined as FEV1/FVC <0.7, GOLDCOPD(VC) as FEV1/VC <0.7 using the maximum value of FVC or SVC, LLNCOPDFVC as FEV1/FVC below the LLN, and LLNCOPDVC as FEV1/VC below the LLN using the maximum value of FVC or SVC. Results: Prevalence of GOLDCOPD(FVC) was 10.0% (95% confidence interval [CI] 8.2-12.0) and the prevalence of LLNCOPDFVC was 9.5% (95% CI 7.8-11.4). When estimates were based on VC, the prevalence became higher; 16.4% (95% CI 14.3-18.9) and 15.6% (95% CI 13.5-17.9) for GOLDCOPD(VC) and LLNCOPDVC, respectively. The group of additional subjects classified as having COPD based on VC, had lower FEV1, more wheeze and higher residual volume compared to subjects without any COPD. Conclusion: The prevalence of COPD was significantly higher when the ratio FEV1/VC was calculated using the highest value of SVC or FVC compared with using FVC only. Subjects classified as having COPD when using the VC concept were more obstructive and with indications of air trapping. Hence, the use of only FVC when assessing airflow limitation may result in a considerable under diagnosis of subjects with mild COPD.
|
|
