Affiliations 

  • 1 Department of Primary Care Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
  • 2 KEM Hospital Research Centre, Pune, India
  • 3 Christian Medical College, Vellore, India
  • 4 Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands
  • 5 NIHR Global Health Research Unit on Respiratory Health (RESPIRE), Usher Institute, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
  • 6 Department of Social and Preventive Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
  • 7 School of Medicine, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, Taylor's University, Subang Jaya, Malaysia
  • 8 Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
J Glob Health, 2021 Jun 19;11:04026.
PMID: 34221357 DOI: 10.7189/jogh.11.04026

Abstract

Background: Chronic respiratory diseases (CRDs) contribute significantly towards the global burden of disease, but the true prevalence and burden of these conditions in adults is unknown in the majority of low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). We aimed to identify strategies - in particular the definitions, study designs, sampling frames, instruments, and outcomes - used to conduct prevalence surveys for CRDs in LMICs. The findings will inform a future RESPIRE Four Country ChrOnic Respiratory Disease (4CCORD) study, which will estimate CRD prevalence, including disease burden, in adults in LMICs.

Methods: We conducted a scoping review to map prevalence surveys conducted in LMICs published between 1995 and 2018. We followed Arksey and O'Malley's six-step framework. The search was conducted in OVID Medline, EMBASE, ISI Web of Science, Global Health, WHO Global Index Medicus and included three domains: CRDs, prevalence and LMICs. After an initial title sift, eight trained reviewers undertook duplicate study selection and data extraction. We charted: country and populations, random sampling strategies, CRD definitions/phenotypes, survey procedure (questionnaires, spirometry, tests), outcomes and assessment of individual, societal and health service burden of disease.

Results: Of 36 872 citations, 281 articles were included: 132 from Asia (41 from China). Study designs were cross-sectional surveys (n = 260), cohort studies (n = 11) and secondary data analysis (n = 10). The number of respondents in these studies ranged from 50 to 512 891. Asthma was studied in 144 studies, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in 112. Most studies (100/144) based identification of asthma on symptom-based questionnaires. In contrast, COPD diagnosis was typically based on spirometry findings (94/112); 65 used fixed-ratio thresholds, 29 reported fixed-ratio and lower-limit-of-normal values. Only five articles used the term 'phenotype'. Most studies used questionnaires derived from validated surveys, most commonly the European Community Respiratory Health Survey (n = 47). The burden/impact of CRD was reported in 33 articles (most commonly activity limitation).

Conclusion: Surveys remain the most practical approach for estimating prevalence of CRD but there is a need to identify the most predictive questions for diagnosing asthma and to standardise diagnostic criteria.

* Title and MeSH Headings from MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.