Annals of Family Medicine
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Annals of Family Medicine 2:110-115 (2004)
© 2004 Annals of Family Medicine, Inc.
doi: 10.1370/afm.40
This Article
Right arrow Abstract
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow In Brief
Right arrow TRACK Discussion: Submit a Comment
Right arrow TRACK Discussion: View Comments
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when TRACK Comments are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by WinklerPrins, V.
Right arrow Articles by van Weel, C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by WinklerPrins, V.
Right arrow Articles by van Weel, C.

Article

The Natural History of Asthma in a Primary Care Cohort

Vince WinklerPrins, MD1, Lotte van den Nieuwenhof, MD2, Henk van den Hoogen, PhD, JHJ2, Hans Bor2 and Chris van Weel, MD, PhD2

1 Department of Family Practice, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Mich
2 Department of General Practice, University of Nijmegen, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

CORRESPONDING AUTHOR: Lotte van den Nieuwenhof, MD, Department of General Practice, University Medical Centre St. Radboud, 229-HSV, PO Box 9101, 6500 HB Nijmegen, The Netherlands, l.vandennieuwenhof{at}hag.umcn.nl


   ABSTRACT
TOP
 ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
 METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 CONCLUSIONS
 REFERENCES
 
BACKGROUND We examined the natural history of asthma in a primary care cohort of patients 10 years after the cohort was stratified for asthma risk by responses to a questionnaire and bronchial hyperresponsiveness (BHR) testing.

METHODS Children and young adults who were born between 1967 and 1979 within 1 of 4 affiliated family practices of the Nijmegen Department of Family Medicine, the Netherlands, were asked to participate in an asthma study in 1989. Of 926 patients available, 581 (63%) agreed to participate. Their family physicians’ diagnoses of upper and lower respiratory tract disease and asthma were prospectively collected during the next 10 years and were analyzed.

RESULTS BHR or the presence of asthma symptoms at screening did not result in a significantly disproportionate number of physician visits during the next 10 years for 4 or more upper or lower respiratory tract infections when compared with patients who did not have these findings at the beginning of the study. The presence of asthma symptoms correlated with an increased risk of an asthma diagnosis or allergic rhinitis in the group of patients who did not have asthma diagnosed at start of the study. One half of the known asthmatic patients at the onset of the study (21 of 44) had no further visits to their physicians for treatment of asthma during the next 10 years.

CONCLUSIONS In primary care, BHR testing has limited value in predicting subsequent respiratory tract disease for patients who have asthma diagnosed by a physician. The use of symptom questionnaires can be of clinical use in predicting asthma.

Key Words: Registries/epidemioloy • bronchial hyperreactivity • asthma, symptoms • diagnosis


   INTRODUCTION
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 CONCLUSIONS
 REFERENCES
 
The current view of asthma is that of a chronic disease with periodic clinical exacerbations,1 a considerable change from our previous view of asthma as primarily episodic in nature. The highly variable nature of the clinical course of asthma makes it difficult for physicians and patients to know at any given time how much treatment is necessary and for how long. Asthma is, in essence, still quite different from other chronic diseases, such as hypertension or hyperlipidemia, the natural histories of which we now know quite well. The only information about the natural history of asthma is based on relatively few cohort studies.2,3 Information about the natural history of asthma in primary care populations remains a missing link between our biological knowledge of the disease and our clinical management of it. Insight into the natural history is complicated by the level of undiagnosed asthma.4–6 Underdiagnosis of asthma is as much a problem for asthma research as it is for practitioners. Although much has been attributed to physicians’ problems in interpretation of clinical information, there are growing indications that patients’ reluctance to complain of symptoms or to adhere to follow-up visits also contribute to underdiagnosis.6

Longitudinal outcome studies of primary care patients with asthma should help us create this linkage and understand the developmental epidemiology of asthma. Such studies require reasonable asthma definitions, stable primary care populations observed for prolonged periods, and—given the frequency of undiagnosed asthma—a population perspective. Most clinical studies of asthma have used a combination of bronchial hyperresponsiveness (BHR) testing and responses to respiratory questionnaires to assist with an asthma diagnosis. Use of these diagnostic tools is consistent with recommendations from the American Thoracic Society,7 World Health Organization, and National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute.8 Others have used physician diagnosis as the standard. Long-term follow-up remains a problem, partly because diagnosed asthma frequently disappears later on. Whether asthma disappears as a consequence of the natural history of asthma, adherence by the patient to treatment, or another phenomenon is not well known.

To improve our knowledge of the natural history of asthma, we observed a primary care cohort of children and adolescents that had been screened 10 years earlier for respiratory tract signs and symptoms by Kolnaar et al.9,10 The objective of the current study was to clarify the natural history of respiratory tract complaints and asthma in primary care.


   METHODS
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 METHODS
RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 CONCLUSIONS
 REFERENCES
 
In 1989, a cohort of children and young adults from 4 affiliated family practices in the Netherlands was identified for an asthma study based on date of birth.9,10 Given the structure of the Dutch health care system, this cohort reflects the characteristics of the population.11 The study of Kolnaar et al9,10 assessed the relation of early childhood respiratory tract morbidity and asthma in adolescence. For that reason, the study was confined to the 926 patients drawn from all the children born in Continuous Morbidity Registration practices (addressed below) between 1967 and 1979, and who were still registered with the practices in 1989. The study cohort did not differ from the original birth cohort in terms of respiratory tract morbidity, but patients were more often of lower social class.9 From this group, 581 agreed to participate, and 551 (60%) were able to complete the testing and questionnaire satisfactorily for interpretation. Again, there were no essential differences between participants and nonparticipants with regard to respiratory tract morbidity. All participants were screened for asthma by a symptom questionnaire and BHR testing.4,9,10 The respiratory symptom questions used in this study are displayed in Table 1Go. This questionnaire was based on the children’s version of the respiratory symptom surveys of the British Medical Research Council and American Thoracic Society.12 Patients were considered symptomatic if they answered "yes" to the questions 1, 3, 4, or 5 (Table 1Go).


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 1. Respiratory Questionnaire Items
 
Histamine challenge testing was assessed by the concise version of the European Respiratory Society standardized testing procedure.13 If the provocative concentration of histamine causing a 20% decline in forced expiratory volume (FEV1) was <=8.0 mg/mL (PC20), the study participants were considered to have a positive BHR test. Details of this study have been previously described.10 At the conclusion of this 1989–1990 study, all participants and their families were informed of their results, and those with symptoms or evidence of BHR were advised to visit their family physician.

No relation could be found between early childhood respiratory tract morbidity (mainly infections) and asthma, respiratory symptoms, or BHR testing results in 1989.9 There was a substantial undiagnosed frequency of asthma (10%),4 however, and we were intrigued by the high frequency of BHR (39%) in otherwise healthy adolescents without symptoms.10

Since 1967, 4 family practices associated with the University of Nijmegen in the southeast of The Netherlands have been continuously collecting outpatient morbidity data from all the patients they serve, a process now called the Nijmegen academic family practice research network Continuous Morbidity Registration (CMR).11,14 The CMR was the source of the population and morbidity data for this study. The CMR provides a database in which the physician diagnoses (morbidity) for each episode of outpatient care are coded and recorded. Each patient has a unique identifier number assigned at the point of care to which the coded morbidity is assigned, and this information is attached to other demographic data available for the patient. The physicians within the 4 practices meet regularly to discuss classification and coding issues to assure accuracy. Confidentiality is assured by having the identifier codes available only at the physician offices.

The Dutch health care system is ideally suited for this type of morbidity study because all patients are registered with a family physician, and all access to care must come through this physician. Family physicians’ records include information of diagnosis and treatment by any other physician to whom the patient may have been referred. The CMR database includes, therefore, all diagnoses made through specialist care; for this study, respiratory tract diagnoses were made by chest physicians, internists, and pediatricians in addition to family physicians. Nearly everyone is insured by a single payer source, and the population is relatively stable. These factors allow excellent patient tracking and outstanding opportunities for studying disease longitudinally.

For this study, patient records were reviewed up to 2000. All but 7 patients could be found for follow-up, and data were available for 323 (59%) patients for the full 10-year period.

At the end of the 10 years of follow-up care, we reviewed the records of cohort patient visits to their family physicians, looking for respiratory tract problems diagnosed by the physicians. The outcomes of the 1989–1990 screening period (symptomatic vs asymptomatic, BHR positive vs BHR negative, and the combination of symptomatic and BHR positive vs asymptomatic and/or BHR negative) were related to CMR-recorded respiratory tract morbidity from 1990 to 2000. Patients who had asthma diagnosed by their family physician before the 1989–1990 screening period were dealt with separately in the analysis. The analysis used the 1989 respiratory tract status of the patients (respiratory symptoms and BHR) as the independent variables, and the 1990–2000 respiratory tract morbidity diagnosed by their family physicians as the dependent variable. We used the Cox proportional hazard analysis to calculate the hazard ratio for getting an asthma diagnosis.


   RESULTS
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 METHODS
 RESULTS
DISCUSSION
 CONCLUSIONS
 REFERENCES
 
Almost all 544 participants had at least 1 physician visit during the 10 years of the study. Fifty percent (272) of the population were women. The average age of the cohort at follow-up was 25 years for women and 24 years for men. Asthma was diagnosed at one time or another in 63 of the 544 patients (11.6%), of which 44 had asthma diagnosed at the onset of the study and 19 had asthma diagnosed after 1989.

From Table 2Go it is apparent that the chance of having asthma diagnosed is significantly increased if patients are symptomatic or are of younger age. Remarkably, the chance is not significantly increased if patients have BHR, and there is no difference by patient sex.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 2. Hazard Ratio for Getting an Asthma Diagnosis (N = 500)
 
Table 3Go relates the baseline symptoms and BHR findings to subsequent upper and lower respiratory tract infections, allergic rhinitis, and asthma for the 298 patients who were still active in the practices and did not have a diagnosis of asthma at the start of the study. It is apparent that those patients with BHR differed little from those with no BHR in the likelihood of having their physician diagnose upper or lower respiratory tract infections, allergic rhinitis, or asthma. Those who answered affirmatively to 1 or more of the asthma questions in 1989 also did not differ greatly in their likelihood of subsequently visiting their physicians with respiratory tract infections. They did, however, have a significantly higher chance of having asthma diagnosed (P = .01, relative risk [RR] = 4.1, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.5–11.5) or an allergic rhinitis diagnosis (P = .001, RR = 3.1, 95% CI, 1.5–6.4).


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 3. Respiratory Tract Symptoms of 298 Active Patients Still in Practice Without an Asthma Diagnosis at Start of Study
 
We compared the outcomes of those members of the cohort thought to be most at risk for respiratory tract problems, ie, those who had a positive BHR test and were symptomatic, with those who had a negative BHR test and were asymptomatic. The 2 groups did not appear to differ in the diagnoses of upper and lower respiratory tract infections. The absolute risk of an asthma diagnosis in this subgroup of symptomatic hyperresponders (n = 50), however, was 10% compared with 2.6% for those who did not have these characteristics (P = .04).


   DISCUSSION
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
CONCLUSIONS
 REFERENCES
 
This study shows that in this cohort of children and young adults, a single positive test for BHR has limited prognostic importance for subsequent respiratory tract illness, including asthma. Because this cohort contains a specific age-group, these results are not generalizable to a different age-group. Nevertheless, the prevalence of asthma of 20 in 1,000 in the study population is in the high-normal range of the Dutch adolescent primary care population,15,16 so the a priori likelihood of asthma is representative of the family practice setting. More than 50% of patients with asthma did not have asthma diagnosed by their family physician,4 which highlights the relevance of case finding.

The results of this study may mean that BHR testing has limited ability to capture the disease accurately. We showed, however, that more than 1 positive answer to questions 1, 3, 4, or 5 on the respiratory symptom questionnaire does correlate with an increased diagnosis of asthma in the future.

This study was aimed at all children and adolescents in the (practice) population and consequently included those with mild and moderate respiratory symptoms. It therefore describes the natural history of asthma as an episodic disease for which most patients will have no major difficulties into adulthood.

Despite the relatively nonspecific symptoms that characterize asthma, various asthma symptom questionnaires have been developed with validation studies to support their use.17–19 These studies found that questionnaires were better than BHR testing as screening tools for asthma. This study confirmed these outcomes. The studies also found that the positive predictive value of symptoms for an asthma diagnosis or for subsequent problems was limited. On the basis of our findings, we calculated a predictive value of 13%, which is in line with the low prognostic value reported by others. We also found that those who had no symptoms gained little prognostic information from BHR testing. It appears that in the epidemiologic study of respiratory tract disease, BHR testing is most useful after respiratory symptoms have been assessed.

Respiratory tract infections, in particular viral infections, increase airway inflammation and thus may provoke or increase symptoms in patients with asthma.20,21 For that reason, it might be expected that patients with asthma would visit their physician more often than nonasthmatic patients for respiratory tract infections. Our data, however, did not confirm this expectation. BHR is a marker of airway inflammation; for that reason, we were particularly interested in the patients who were asymptomatic in 1989 for BHR. The lack of respiratory tract episodes in the 10 years of follow-up make it improbable that in our cohort BHR heralded an early state of airway inflammation, which might be an important difference from the other studies.

In 1962, BHR was included in the already established definition of asthma as a disease characterized by reversible airflow obstruction.22 A single BHR reading seems insufficient, however, to yield much useful information. When we applied more stringent criteria to the definition of BHR by reducing the PC20 cutoffs for FEV1 to <=4 mg/mL, <=2 mg/mL, and <=1 mg/mL, we obtained fewer hyperresponsive patients, but a larger percentage of those had physician-diagnosed asthma. Because severity of BHR appears to correlate with asthma and a poorer outcome,23 this finding is not surprising. In changing the diagnostic criteria, we improved the specificity of these tests for an asthma diagnosis, but in exchange, we diminished the sensitivity of the test to detect asthma. Josephs et al24 found that PC20 measurements did not consistently correlate with exacerbations of asthma. Pattemore et al25 believed that BHR testing could "not reliably or precisely separate asthmatics from nonasthmatics in the general community." Salome et al26 studied BHR, respiratory tract symptoms, and asthma in 2,363 Australian children and noted that the association between these parameters and asthma is significant but incomplete. Britton and Tattersfield27 suggested that the validity of a positive BHR test in the clinical diagnosis of asthma is limited. Rasmussen et al28 in their Odense Schoolchild Study showed that in 10 years of follow-up, those with asymptomatic BHR on exercise testing had a weakly associated increase in coughing and wheezing. Many other community studies have confirmed the weak association between asymptomatic BHR and the subsequent development of asthma.29,30 Laprise and Boulet,31 however, showed that patients with asymptomatic airway hyperresponsiveness had a greater increase in airway responsiveness and frequency of development of asthma symptoms than did normoresponsive patients. Zhong et al32 reported that 45% of asymptomatic students with positive BHR tests developed asthma in the following 2 years.

The strength of the CMR database is its completeness and the reliability of its recorded morbidity data.33 This study does not elucidate the qualitative experiences of the cohort in regard to respiratory disease and has selected only to look at the morbidity of this group recorded by their physicians in the 10 years after testing. The number of cases of asthma in the community, however, is not well known to the family physician.4 Van den Boom et al34 showed in his primary care DIMCA study that a great many adults have considerable respiratory tract difficulties that they have not made known to their physician. This finding remains fascinating, because effective treatment of asthma is possible and from a physicians’ perspective desirable. By not telling physicians about their symptoms of asthma, patients hamper the implementation of such treatment. A qualitative study to explore the patient’s perspective is planned in a later phase of this study.

We have found BHR testing does not help us a great deal with determining who will have problems and who will require an intervention. We did find, however, that a positive answer to the asthma symptom questionnaire was associated with an increased risk of an asthma diagnosis in the future, which suggests that the use of an asthma symptom questionnaire does have clinical significance. Until we better understand the natural history of asthma in primary care and find better ways of looking for and treating patients at most risk, we will need to continue to be cautious about its diagnosis and management.


   CONCLUSIONS
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 CONCLUSIONS
REFERENCES
 
The majority of those with diagnosed asthma or asthma symptoms in primary care do not have continuous problems with the disease.

A single test for BHR has a relatively low predictive value for adverse respiratory tract outcome.

More than 1 positive answer to an asthma symptom questionnaire increases the chance for patients having asthma diagnosed in the future.


   ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
 
The authors acknowledge the help of John Hickner, MD, for his editorial assistance, and Henry Barry, MD, for his statistical acumen.


   FOOTNOTES
 
Conflicts of interest: none reported

Funding support: This study received financial support from the Dutch Asthma Foundation.

Received for publication December 20, 2002. Revision received April 4, 2003. Accepted for publication April 18, 2003.


   REFERENCES
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 CONCLUSIONS
 REFERENCES
 

  1. National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute. Department of Health and Human Services. National Institutes of Health. Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Management of Asthma: Expert Panel Report 2. Washington, DC: National Institutes of Health; 1997. Publication 97–4051.
  2. Bronnimann S, Burrows B. A prospective study of the natural history of asthma. Remission and relapse rates. Chest. 1986;90:480–484.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  3. Silverstein MD, Reed CE, O’Connell EJ, Melton LJ, III, O’Fallon WM, Yunginger JW. Long-term survival of a cohort of community residents with asthma. N Engl J Med. 1994;331:1537–1541.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  4. Kolnaar B, Beissel E, van den Bosch WJ, Folgering H, van den Hoogen HJ, van Weel C. Asthma in adolescents and young adults: screening outcome versus diagnosis in general practice. Fam Pract. 1994;11:133–140.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  5. Speight AN, Lee DA, Hey EN. Underdiagnosis and undertreatment of asthma in childhood. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed). 1983;286:1253–1256.[Medline]
  6. van Weel C. Underdiagnosis of asthma and COPD: is the general practitioner to blame? Monaldi Arch Chest Dis. 2002;57:65–68.[Medline]
  7. Standards for the diagnosis and care of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and asthma. This official statement of the American Thoracic Society was adopted by the ATS Board of Directors, November 1986. Am Rev Respir Dis. 1987;136:225–244.[Medline]
  8. National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute. Department of Health and Human Services. National Institutes of Health. Global Initiative for Asthma, Global Strategy for Asthma Management and Prevention NHLBI/WHO workshop report. Bethesda, Md: National Institutes of Health; 1995;95–3659.
  9. Kolnaar BG, van Lier A, van den Bosch WJ, et al. Asthma in adolescents and young adults: relationship with early childhood respiratory morbidity. Br J Gen Pract. 1994;44:73–78.[Medline]
  10. Kolnaar BG, Folgering H, van den Hoogen HJ, van Weel C. Asymptomatic bronchial hyperresponsiveness in adolescents and young adults. Eur Respir J. 1997;10:44–50.[Abstract]
  11. van Weel C, Smith H, Beasley JW. Family practice research networks. Experiences from 3 countries. J Fam Pract. 2000;49:938–943.[Medline]
  12. Ferris BG. Epidemiology Standardization Project (American Thoracic Society). Am Rev Respir Dis. 1978;118:1–120.[Medline]
  13. Standardized lung function testing. Official statement of the European Respiratory Society. Eur Respir J. Suppl 1993;16:1–100.[CrossRef][Medline]
  14. van Weel C, van den Bosch WJ, van den Hoogen HJ, Smits AJ. Development of respiratory illness in childhood--a longitudinal study in general practice. J R Coll Gen Pract. 1987;37:404–408.[Medline]
  15. Lamberts H. In Het Huis van de Huisarts. Verslag van bet Transitieproject. 2nd ed. Lelystad: Meditekst; 1994.
  16. van de Lisdonk EH, van den Bosch WHJM, Huygen FJH, Lagro-Janssen ALM, eds. 3rd ed. Ziekten in de Huisartspraktijk. Maarssen: Bunge/Elsevier; 1999.
  17. Bai J, Peat JK, Berry G, Marks GB, Woolcock AJ. Questionnaire items that predict asthma and other respiratory conditions in adults. Chest. 1998;114:1343–1348.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  18. Jenkins MA, Clarke JR, Carlin JB, et al. Validation of questionnaire and bronchial hyperresponsiveness against respiratory physician assessment in the diagnosis of asthma. Int J Epidemiol. 1996;25:609–616.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  19. Peat JK, Toelle BG, Salome CM, Woolcock AJ. Predictive nature of bronchial responsiveness and respiratory symptoms in a one year cohort study of Sydney schoolchildren. Eur Respir J. 1993;6:662–669.[Abstract]
  20. Johnston SL, Pattemore PK, Sanderson G, et al. Community study of role of viral infections in exacerbations of asthma in 9–11 year old children. BMJ. 1995;310:1225–1229.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  21. Pattemore PK, Johnston SL, Bardin PG. Viruses as precipitants of asthma symptoms. I. Epidemiology. Clin Exp Allergy. 1992;22:325–336.[CrossRef][Medline]
  22. American Thoracic Society. Definitions and classifications of chronic bronchitis, asthma and pulmonary emphysema. Am Rev Respir Dis. 1962;85:762–768.
  23. Peat JK, Salome CM, Sedgwick CS, Kerrebijn J, Woolcock AJ. A prospective study of bronchial hyperresponsiveness and respiratory symptoms in a population of Australian schoolchildren. Clin Exp Allergy. 1989;19:299–306.[CrossRef][Medline]
  24. Josephs LK, Gregg I, Mullee MA, Holgate ST. Nonspecific bronchial reactivity and its relationship to the clinical expression of asthma. A longitudinal study. Am Rev Respir Dis. 1989;140:350–357.[Medline]
  25. Pattemore PK, Asher MI, Harrison AC, Mitchell EA, Rea HH, Stewart AW. The interrelationship among bronchial hyperresponsiveness, the diagnosis of asthma, and asthma symptoms. Am Rev Respir Dis. 1990;142:549–554.[Medline]
  26. Salome CM, Peat JK, Britton WJ, Woolcock AJ. Bronchial hyper-responsiveness in two populations of Australian schoolchildren. I. Relation to respiratory symptoms and diagnosed asthma. Clin Allergy. 1987;17:271–281.[CrossRef][Medline]
  27. Britton J, Tattersfield AE. Does measurement of bronchial hyper-reactivity help in the clinical diagnosis of asthma? Eur J Respir Dis. 1986;68:233–238.[Medline]
  28. Rasmussen F, Lambrechtsen J, Siersted HC, Hansen HS, Hansen NC. Asymptomatic bronchial hyperresponsiveness to exercise in childhood and the development of asthma related symptoms in young adulthood: the Odense Schoolchild Study. Thorax. 1999;54: 587–589.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  29. Lombardi E, Morgan WJ, Wright AL, Stein RT, Holberg CJ, Martinez FD. Cold air challenge at age 6 and subsequent incidence of asthma. A longitudinal study. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 1997;156:1863–1869.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  30. de Gooijer A, Brand PL, Gerritsen J, Koeter GH, Postma DS, Knol K. Changes in respiratory symptoms and airway hyperresponsiveness after 27 years in a population-based sample of school children. Eur Respir J. 1993;6:848–854.[Abstract]
  31. Laprise C, Boulet LP. Asymptomatic airway hyperresponsiveness: a three-year follow-up. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 1997;156:403–409.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  32. Zhong NS, Chen RC, Yang MO, Wu ZY, Zheng JP, Li YF. Is asymptomatic bronchial hyperresponsiveness an indication of potential asthma? A two-year follow-up of young students with bronchial hyperresponsiveness. Chest. 1992;102:1104–1109.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  33. van Weel C. Validating long term morbidity recording. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1995;49 Suppl 1:29–32.[Medline]
  34. van den Boom G, van Schayck CP, van Mollen MP, et al. Active detection of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and asthma in the general population. Results and economic consequences of the DIMCA program. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 1998;158:1730–1738.[Abstract/Free Full Text]



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Eur Respir JHome page
L. van den Nieuwenhof, T. Schermer, Y. Heijdra, B. Bottema, R. Akkermans, H. Folgering, and C. van Weel
Are asymptomatic airway hyperresponsiveness and allergy risk factors for asthma? A longitudinal study
Eur. Respir. J., July 1, 2008; 32(1): 70 - 76.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Ann Fam MedHome page
K. C. Stange
Improving Health Care Locally and Globally
Ann. Fam. Med, July 1, 2004; 2(4): 368 - 370.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Ann Fam MedHome page
K. C. Stange
The Future of Family Medicine? Reflections from the Front Lines Reveal Frustration and Opportunity
Ann. Fam. Med, May 1, 2004; 2(3): 274 - 277.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Ann Fam MedHome page
W. R. Phillips
In This Issue: Research in the Community and Clinic
Ann. Fam. Med, March 1, 2004; 2(2): 98 - 100.
[Full Text] [PDF]

TRACK Comments:

Read all TRACK Comments

The Natural History of Asthma in a Primary Care Cohort
Eric A. Jackson, PharmD
Annals of Family Medicine, 6 Apr 2004 [Full text]
Asthma natural history and diagnosis
Mike Thomas, et al.
Annals of Family Medicine, 15 Apr 2004 [Full text]
The Natural History of Asthma in a Primary Care Cohort
H. John Fardy
Annals of Family Medicine, 16 Apr 2004 [Full text]
The Natural History of Asthma in a Primary Care Cohort
Lotte van den Nieuwenhof, et al.
Annals of Family Medicine, 29 Apr 2004 [Full text]
Natural history of asthma
Brett G Toelle, et al.
Annals of Family Medicine, 9 May 2004 [Full text]
Natural history of asthma
Lotte van den Nieuwenhof, et al.
Annals of Family Medicine, 27 May 2004 [Full text]
This Article
Right arrow Abstract
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow In Brief
Right arrow TRACK Discussion: Submit a Comment
Right arrow TRACK Discussion: View Comments
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when TRACK Comments are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by WinklerPrins, V.
Right arrow Articles by van Weel, C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by WinklerPrins, V.
Right arrow Articles by van Weel, C.

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS