| Literature DB >> 15638942 |
Anne Bernadette Chang1, Justin Thomas Gaffney, Matthew Michael Eastburn, Joan Faoagali, Nancy C Cox, Ian Brent Masters.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cough is the most common symptom presenting to doctors. The quality of cough (productive or wet vs dry) is used clinically as well as in epidemiology and clinical research. There is however no data on the validity of cough quality descriptors. The study aims were to compare (1) cough quality (wet/dry and brassy/non-brassy) to bronchoscopic findings of secretions and tracheomalacia respectively and, (2) parent's vs clinician's evaluation of the cough quality (wet/dry).Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2005 PMID: 15638942 PMCID: PMC545936 DOI: 10.1186/1465-9921-6-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Respir Res ISSN: 1465-9921
Figure 1Bronchoscopic secretion quantification card.
Assessment of cough quality vs bronchoscopic findings with BS cut off at grade 3*
| 1.00 | 0.55 | 1 | 0.64 | 2.21 | |
| Cough quality (wet/dry) | |||||
| assessed by clinician (n = 96) | |||||
| 0.95 | 0.54 | 0.93 | 0.61 | 2.06 | |
| Cough quality (wet/dry) | |||||
| assessed by parents (n = 92) | |||||
| 0.98 | 0.54 | 0.97 | 0.62 | 2.10 | |
| 0.57 | 0.81 | 0.84 | 0.52 | 3.12 |
*Cough quality (wet/dry) assessed by clinicians combined with parents. When cough was non-assessable by clinician and child has current cough, parental assessment of the cough (wet or dry) was taken. If child has no history of current cough, cough was assigned 'dry'.
LR = likelihood ratio.
Specificity, sensitivity of dry and wet cough was assessed against bronchoscopic findings as the gold standard where *BS grades ≥ 3 were considered abnormal (secretions present) and ≤ 2 considered normal (no secretions). #That for tracheomalacia was assessed using clinicians record of presence/absence of brassy cough with bronchoscopic findings of tracheomalacia.[21]
Assessment of cough quality vs bronchoscopic findings with BS cut off at grade 4*
| 0.79 | 0.75 | 0.82 | 0.72 | 3.22 | |
| Cough quality (wet or dry) | |||||
| assessed by clinician (n = 96) | |||||
| 0.78 | 0.71 | 0.80 | 0.67 | 2.69 | |
| Cough quality (wet or dry) | |||||
| assessed by parents (n = 92) | |||||
| 0.77 | 0.73 | 0.80 | 0.69 | 2.88 |
*Cough quality (wet/dry) assessed by clinicians combined with parents. When cough was non-assessable by clinician and child has current cough, parental assessment of the cough (wet or dry) was taken. If child has no history of current cough, cough was assigned 'dry'.
LR = likelihood ratio.
Specificity, sensitivity of dry and wet cough was assessed against bronchoscopic findings as the gold standard where BS grades ≥ 4 were considered abnormal (secretions present) and ≤ 3 considered normal (no secretions).
Figure 2ROC curve with 95%CI relating cough quality (wet/dry) to bronchoscopic secretion (BS) grades from 1–6.
Cellular differential profile in BALs
| ≤2 (n = 31) | 195 (290) | 82.0 (15.8) | 5.0 (7) | 13.5 (15.8) | 0 (0) |
| ≥3 (n = 70) | 334.0 (425) | 66.0 (45) | 12.0 (38) | 11.0 (16.0) | 0 (0) |
| p value^ | 0.038 | 0.001 | 0.006 | 0.605 | 0.758 |
| ≤3 (n = 52) | 176 (257) | 81.0 (17.0) | 6.0 (8.0) | 13.0 (16.0) | 0 (0) |
| ≥4 (n = 49) | 368 (574) | 51.5 (59.8) | 20.0 (47.0) | 11.0 (15.0) | 0 (5) |
| p value^ | 0.0001 | 0.0001 | 0.0001 | 0.445 | 0.613 |
| Wet (n = 45) | 365 (522) | 51.5 (49.8) | 25.0 (43) | 13.0 (16) | 0 0 |
| Dry (n = 25) | 176 (315) | 80.5 (24.8)) | 5.5 (13.0) | 1.8 (16.0) | 0 (0) |
| No history (n = 28) | 80 (310) | 15 (16.5) | 1 (7.5) | 1 (11.5) | 0 (0) |
| 310 | 16.5 | 7.5 | 11.5 | 0 | |
| p value^ | 0.017 | 0.0001 | 0.001 | 0.242 | 0.769 |
^p value = examined using Kruskal Wallis test.
*assessed by clinician
TCC = total cell count; N = neutrophils, M = macrophages, L = lymphocytes, Eos = eosinophils,