Comparison between objective measures of smoking and self-reported smoking status in patients with asthma or COPD: are our patients telling us the truth?

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Stelmach,Rafael
Data de Publicação: 2015
Outros Autores: Fernandes,Frederico Leon Arrabal, Carvalho-Pinto,Regina Maria, Athanazio,Rodrigo Abensur, Rached,Samia Zahi, Prado,Gustavo Faibischew, Cukier,Alberto
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Jornal Brasileiro de Pneumologia (Online)
Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1806-37132015000200124
Resumo: OBJECTIVE: Smoking prevalence is frequently estimated on the basis of self-reported smoking status. That can lead to an underestimation of smoking rates. The aim of this study was to evaluate the difference between self-reported smoking status and that determined through the use of objective measures of smoking at a pulmonary outpatient clinic. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study involving 144 individuals: 51 asthma patients, 53 COPD patients, 20 current smokers, and 20 never-smokers. Smoking status was determined on the basis of self-reports obtained in interviews, as well as through tests of exhaled carbon monoxide (eCO) and urinary cotinine. RESULTS: All of the asthma patients and COPD patients declared they were not current smokers. In the COPD and asthma patients, the median urinary cotinine concentration was 167 ng/mL (range, 2-5,348 ng/mL) and 47 ng/mL (range, 5-2,735 ng/mL), respectively (p < 0.0001), whereas the median eCO level was 8 ppm (range, 0-31 ppm) and 5 ppm (range, 2-45 ppm), respectively (p < 0.05). In 40 (38%) of the patients with asthma or COPD (n = 104), there was disagreement between the self-reported smoking status and that determined on the basis of the urinary cotinine concentration, a concentration > 200 ng/mL being considered indicative of current smoking. In 48 (46%) of those 104 patients, the self-reported non-smoking status was refuted by an eCO level > 6 ppm, which is also considered indicative of current smoking. In 30 (29%) of the patients with asthma or COPD, the urinary cotinine concentration and the eCO level both belied the patient claims of not being current smokers. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that high proportions of smoking pulmonary patients with lung disease falsely declare themselves to be nonsmokers. The accurate classification of smoking status is pivotal to the treatment of lung diseases. Objective measures of smoking could be helpful in improving clinical management and counseling.
id SBPT-1_5f8b437b6320dbac49d1f5d88227633a
oai_identifier_str oai:scielo:S1806-37132015000200124
network_acronym_str SBPT-1
network_name_str Jornal Brasileiro de Pneumologia (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling Comparison between objective measures of smoking and self-reported smoking status in patients with asthma or COPD: are our patients telling us the truth?AsthmaPulmonary disease, chronic obstructiveCotinineCarbon monoxideSmoking OBJECTIVE: Smoking prevalence is frequently estimated on the basis of self-reported smoking status. That can lead to an underestimation of smoking rates. The aim of this study was to evaluate the difference between self-reported smoking status and that determined through the use of objective measures of smoking at a pulmonary outpatient clinic. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study involving 144 individuals: 51 asthma patients, 53 COPD patients, 20 current smokers, and 20 never-smokers. Smoking status was determined on the basis of self-reports obtained in interviews, as well as through tests of exhaled carbon monoxide (eCO) and urinary cotinine. RESULTS: All of the asthma patients and COPD patients declared they were not current smokers. In the COPD and asthma patients, the median urinary cotinine concentration was 167 ng/mL (range, 2-5,348 ng/mL) and 47 ng/mL (range, 5-2,735 ng/mL), respectively (p < 0.0001), whereas the median eCO level was 8 ppm (range, 0-31 ppm) and 5 ppm (range, 2-45 ppm), respectively (p < 0.05). In 40 (38%) of the patients with asthma or COPD (n = 104), there was disagreement between the self-reported smoking status and that determined on the basis of the urinary cotinine concentration, a concentration > 200 ng/mL being considered indicative of current smoking. In 48 (46%) of those 104 patients, the self-reported non-smoking status was refuted by an eCO level > 6 ppm, which is also considered indicative of current smoking. In 30 (29%) of the patients with asthma or COPD, the urinary cotinine concentration and the eCO level both belied the patient claims of not being current smokers. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that high proportions of smoking pulmonary patients with lung disease falsely declare themselves to be nonsmokers. The accurate classification of smoking status is pivotal to the treatment of lung diseases. Objective measures of smoking could be helpful in improving clinical management and counseling. Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisiologia2015-04-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1806-37132015000200124Jornal Brasileiro de Pneumologia v.41 n.2 2015reponame:Jornal Brasileiro de Pneumologia (Online)instname:Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisiologia (SBPT)instacron:SBPT10.1590/S1806-37132015000004526info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessStelmach,RafaelFernandes,Frederico Leon ArrabalCarvalho-Pinto,Regina MariaAthanazio,Rodrigo AbensurRached,Samia ZahiPrado,Gustavo FaibischewCukier,Albertoeng2015-08-04T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S1806-37132015000200124Revistahttp://www.jornaldepneumologia.com.br/default.aspONGhttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.php||jbp@jbp.org.br|| jpneumo@jornaldepneumologia.com.br1806-37561806-3713opendoar:2015-08-04T00:00Jornal Brasileiro de Pneumologia (Online) - Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisiologia (SBPT)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Comparison between objective measures of smoking and self-reported smoking status in patients with asthma or COPD: are our patients telling us the truth?
title Comparison between objective measures of smoking and self-reported smoking status in patients with asthma or COPD: are our patients telling us the truth?
spellingShingle Comparison between objective measures of smoking and self-reported smoking status in patients with asthma or COPD: are our patients telling us the truth?
Stelmach,Rafael
Asthma
Pulmonary disease, chronic obstructive
Cotinine
Carbon monoxide
Smoking
title_short Comparison between objective measures of smoking and self-reported smoking status in patients with asthma or COPD: are our patients telling us the truth?
title_full Comparison between objective measures of smoking and self-reported smoking status in patients with asthma or COPD: are our patients telling us the truth?
title_fullStr Comparison between objective measures of smoking and self-reported smoking status in patients with asthma or COPD: are our patients telling us the truth?
title_full_unstemmed Comparison between objective measures of smoking and self-reported smoking status in patients with asthma or COPD: are our patients telling us the truth?
title_sort Comparison between objective measures of smoking and self-reported smoking status in patients with asthma or COPD: are our patients telling us the truth?
author Stelmach,Rafael
author_facet Stelmach,Rafael
Fernandes,Frederico Leon Arrabal
Carvalho-Pinto,Regina Maria
Athanazio,Rodrigo Abensur
Rached,Samia Zahi
Prado,Gustavo Faibischew
Cukier,Alberto
author_role author
author2 Fernandes,Frederico Leon Arrabal
Carvalho-Pinto,Regina Maria
Athanazio,Rodrigo Abensur
Rached,Samia Zahi
Prado,Gustavo Faibischew
Cukier,Alberto
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Stelmach,Rafael
Fernandes,Frederico Leon Arrabal
Carvalho-Pinto,Regina Maria
Athanazio,Rodrigo Abensur
Rached,Samia Zahi
Prado,Gustavo Faibischew
Cukier,Alberto
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Asthma
Pulmonary disease, chronic obstructive
Cotinine
Carbon monoxide
Smoking
topic Asthma
Pulmonary disease, chronic obstructive
Cotinine
Carbon monoxide
Smoking
description OBJECTIVE: Smoking prevalence is frequently estimated on the basis of self-reported smoking status. That can lead to an underestimation of smoking rates. The aim of this study was to evaluate the difference between self-reported smoking status and that determined through the use of objective measures of smoking at a pulmonary outpatient clinic. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study involving 144 individuals: 51 asthma patients, 53 COPD patients, 20 current smokers, and 20 never-smokers. Smoking status was determined on the basis of self-reports obtained in interviews, as well as through tests of exhaled carbon monoxide (eCO) and urinary cotinine. RESULTS: All of the asthma patients and COPD patients declared they were not current smokers. In the COPD and asthma patients, the median urinary cotinine concentration was 167 ng/mL (range, 2-5,348 ng/mL) and 47 ng/mL (range, 5-2,735 ng/mL), respectively (p < 0.0001), whereas the median eCO level was 8 ppm (range, 0-31 ppm) and 5 ppm (range, 2-45 ppm), respectively (p < 0.05). In 40 (38%) of the patients with asthma or COPD (n = 104), there was disagreement between the self-reported smoking status and that determined on the basis of the urinary cotinine concentration, a concentration > 200 ng/mL being considered indicative of current smoking. In 48 (46%) of those 104 patients, the self-reported non-smoking status was refuted by an eCO level > 6 ppm, which is also considered indicative of current smoking. In 30 (29%) of the patients with asthma or COPD, the urinary cotinine concentration and the eCO level both belied the patient claims of not being current smokers. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that high proportions of smoking pulmonary patients with lung disease falsely declare themselves to be nonsmokers. The accurate classification of smoking status is pivotal to the treatment of lung diseases. Objective measures of smoking could be helpful in improving clinical management and counseling.
publishDate 2015
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2015-04-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1806-37132015000200124
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1806-37132015000200124
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 10.1590/S1806-37132015000004526
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisiologia
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisiologia
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Jornal Brasileiro de Pneumologia v.41 n.2 2015
reponame:Jornal Brasileiro de Pneumologia (Online)
instname:Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisiologia (SBPT)
instacron:SBPT
instname_str Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisiologia (SBPT)
instacron_str SBPT
institution SBPT
reponame_str Jornal Brasileiro de Pneumologia (Online)
collection Jornal Brasileiro de Pneumologia (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Jornal Brasileiro de Pneumologia (Online) - Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisiologia (SBPT)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv ||jbp@jbp.org.br|| jpneumo@jornaldepneumologia.com.br
_version_ 1750318346278010880