Diagnostic disparity of previous and revised American Thoracic Society guidelines for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis

3Citations
Citations of this article
10Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: A revised guideline for the diagnosis of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) was formulated by the American Thoracic Society (ATS) in 2011 to improve disease diagnosis and provide a simplified algorithm for clinicians. The impact of these revisions on patient classification, however, remain unclear. OBJECTIVE: To examine the concordance between diagnostic guidelines to understand how revisions impact patient classification. Methods: A cohort of 54 patients with either suspected IPF or a working diagnosis of IPF was evaluated in a retrospective chart review, in which patient data were examined according to previous and revised ATS guidelines. Patient characteristics influencing the fulfillment of diagnostic criteria were compared using one-way ANOVA and '2 tests. Results : Revised and previous guideline criteria for IPF were met in 78% and 83% of patients, respectively. Revised guidelines modified a classification based on previous guidelines in 28% of cases. Fifteen percent of patients meeting previous ATS guidelines failed to meet revised criteria due to a lack of honeycombing on high-resolution computed tomography and the absence of a surgical lung biopsy. Patients failing to meet previous and revised diagnostic criteria for IPF were younger. Conclusion: The revised guidelines for the diagnosis of IPF classify a substantial proportion of patients differently than the previous guidelines.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Fidler, L., Shapera, S., Mittoo, S., & Marras, T. K. (2015, March 1). Diagnostic disparity of previous and revised American Thoracic Society guidelines for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Canadian Respiratory Journal. Pulsus Group Inc. https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/307893

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free