Cargando…

Studies of the symptom dyspnoea: A systematic review

BACKGROUND: To deal with patients suffering from dyspnoea, it is crucial for general practitioners to know the prevalences of different diseases causing dyspnoea in the respective area and season, the likelihood of avoidable life-threatening conditions and of worsening or recovery from disease. AIM:...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Viniol, Annika, Beidatsch, Dominik, Frese, Thomas, Bergmann, Milena, Grevenrath, Paula, Schmidt, Laura, Schwarm, Sonja, Haasenritter, Jörg, Bösner, Stefan, Becker, Annette
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4619993/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26498502
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12875-015-0373-z
_version_ 1782397229796950016
author Viniol, Annika
Beidatsch, Dominik
Frese, Thomas
Bergmann, Milena
Grevenrath, Paula
Schmidt, Laura
Schwarm, Sonja
Haasenritter, Jörg
Bösner, Stefan
Becker, Annette
author_facet Viniol, Annika
Beidatsch, Dominik
Frese, Thomas
Bergmann, Milena
Grevenrath, Paula
Schmidt, Laura
Schwarm, Sonja
Haasenritter, Jörg
Bösner, Stefan
Becker, Annette
author_sort Viniol, Annika
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: To deal with patients suffering from dyspnoea, it is crucial for general practitioners to know the prevalences of different diseases causing dyspnoea in the respective area and season, the likelihood of avoidable life-threatening conditions and of worsening or recovery from disease. AIM: Aim of our project was to conduct a systematic review of symptom-evaluating studies on the prevalence, aetiology, and prognosis of dyspnoea as presented to GPs in a primary care setting. METHODS: We did a systematic review of symptom-evaluating studies on dyspnoea in primary care. For this we included all studies investigating the complaint “dyspnoea” as a primary or secondary consulting reason in general practice. Apart from qualitative studies, all kind of study designs independent from type of data assessment, outcome measurement or study quality were included. Symptom-evaluating studies from other settings than primary care and studies which exclusively included children (age <18 years) were excluded from the review. Studies selecting patients prior to recruitment, e.g. because of an increased probability for a particular diagnosis, were also excluded. RESULTS: This systematic review identified 6 symptom evaluating studies on dyspnoea in the primary care setting. The prevalence of dyspnoea as reason for consultation ranges from 0.87 to 2.59 % in general practice. Among all dyspnoea patients 2.7 % (CI 2.2–3.3) suffer from pneumonia. Further specification of underlying aetiologies seems difficult due to the studies’ heterogeneity showing a great variety of probabilities. CONCLUSION: There is a great lack of empirical evidence on the prevalence, aetiology and prognosis of dyspnoea in general practice. This might yield uncertainty in diagnosis and evaluation of dyspnoea in primary care.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4619993
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-46199932015-10-26 Studies of the symptom dyspnoea: A systematic review Viniol, Annika Beidatsch, Dominik Frese, Thomas Bergmann, Milena Grevenrath, Paula Schmidt, Laura Schwarm, Sonja Haasenritter, Jörg Bösner, Stefan Becker, Annette BMC Fam Pract Research Article BACKGROUND: To deal with patients suffering from dyspnoea, it is crucial for general practitioners to know the prevalences of different diseases causing dyspnoea in the respective area and season, the likelihood of avoidable life-threatening conditions and of worsening or recovery from disease. AIM: Aim of our project was to conduct a systematic review of symptom-evaluating studies on the prevalence, aetiology, and prognosis of dyspnoea as presented to GPs in a primary care setting. METHODS: We did a systematic review of symptom-evaluating studies on dyspnoea in primary care. For this we included all studies investigating the complaint “dyspnoea” as a primary or secondary consulting reason in general practice. Apart from qualitative studies, all kind of study designs independent from type of data assessment, outcome measurement or study quality were included. Symptom-evaluating studies from other settings than primary care and studies which exclusively included children (age <18 years) were excluded from the review. Studies selecting patients prior to recruitment, e.g. because of an increased probability for a particular diagnosis, were also excluded. RESULTS: This systematic review identified 6 symptom evaluating studies on dyspnoea in the primary care setting. The prevalence of dyspnoea as reason for consultation ranges from 0.87 to 2.59 % in general practice. Among all dyspnoea patients 2.7 % (CI 2.2–3.3) suffer from pneumonia. Further specification of underlying aetiologies seems difficult due to the studies’ heterogeneity showing a great variety of probabilities. CONCLUSION: There is a great lack of empirical evidence on the prevalence, aetiology and prognosis of dyspnoea in general practice. This might yield uncertainty in diagnosis and evaluation of dyspnoea in primary care. BioMed Central 2015-10-24 /pmc/articles/PMC4619993/ /pubmed/26498502 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12875-015-0373-z Text en © Viniol et al. 2015 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Viniol, Annika
Beidatsch, Dominik
Frese, Thomas
Bergmann, Milena
Grevenrath, Paula
Schmidt, Laura
Schwarm, Sonja
Haasenritter, Jörg
Bösner, Stefan
Becker, Annette
Studies of the symptom dyspnoea: A systematic review
title Studies of the symptom dyspnoea: A systematic review
title_full Studies of the symptom dyspnoea: A systematic review
title_fullStr Studies of the symptom dyspnoea: A systematic review
title_full_unstemmed Studies of the symptom dyspnoea: A systematic review
title_short Studies of the symptom dyspnoea: A systematic review
title_sort studies of the symptom dyspnoea: a systematic review
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4619993/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26498502
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12875-015-0373-z
work_keys_str_mv AT viniolannika studiesofthesymptomdyspnoeaasystematicreview
AT beidatschdominik studiesofthesymptomdyspnoeaasystematicreview
AT fresethomas studiesofthesymptomdyspnoeaasystematicreview
AT bergmannmilena studiesofthesymptomdyspnoeaasystematicreview
AT grevenrathpaula studiesofthesymptomdyspnoeaasystematicreview
AT schmidtlaura studiesofthesymptomdyspnoeaasystematicreview
AT schwarmsonja studiesofthesymptomdyspnoeaasystematicreview
AT haasenritterjorg studiesofthesymptomdyspnoeaasystematicreview
AT bosnerstefan studiesofthesymptomdyspnoeaasystematicreview
AT beckerannette studiesofthesymptomdyspnoeaasystematicreview