Isgrò V, Sultana J, Fontana A, Ientile V, Alecci U, Scoglio R, Magliozzo F, Scondotto S, Caramori G, Cazzola M, and Trifirò G
Aim: The aim of this study was to measure gender differences among COPD patients' quality of care (QOC) before and after two educational interventions in Southern Italy., Methods: In this prospective cohort study, COPD patients were identified from primary care electronic medical records (EMRs). Twelve process indicators concerning diagnosis, preventative measures and therapeutic processes were developed as a measure of QOC. Educational interventions consisted of clinical seminars and audits on COPD QOC at baseline, and at 12 and 24 months. QOC indicators were stratified by gender: odds ratios (ORs) (males as reference group) of having a good QOC indicator were calculated at baseline, 12 and 24 months, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using hierarchical generalised linear models., Results: Of 46 326 people registered in the EMRs, 1463 COPD patients (3.1%) were identified, of which 37% were women. QOC indicators reflecting best practice 24 months after the educational programme were generally not different to baseline, often favouring men. On the other hand, the composite global QOC indicator suggested that while a good overall QOC at baseline was significantly higher in men than women (OR: 0.74; 95% CI: 0.57-0.96), it became nonsignificant at 24 months (OR: 0.96; 95% CI: 0.72-1.29)., Conclusions: Specific QOC indicators among COPD patients often favoured men. However, several gender disparities seen at baseline disappeared at 24 months, suggesting that even general educational interventions which do not target gender can improve the gender disparity in QOC., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: V. Isgrò has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: J. Sultana has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: A. Fontana has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: V. Ientile has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: U. Alecci has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: R. Scoglio has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: F. Magliozzo has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: S. Scondotto has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: G. Caramori has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: M. Cazzola reports participation in courses sponsored by Almirall, AstraZeneca, Biofutura, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi Farmaceutici, Cipla, Edmond Pharma, GlaxoSmithKline, Lallemand, Menarini Group, Mundipharma, Novartis, Pfizer, Teva, Verona Pharma and Zambon; and consultancy for ABC Farmaceutici, AstraZeneca, Chiesi Farmaceutici, Edmond Pharma, Lallemand, Novartis, Ockham Biotech, Verona Pharma and Zambon, all outside the submitted work. Conflict of interest: G. Trifirò reports an unconditional grant from Novartis and a pharmacovigilance grant (Evaluating the appropriate use and safety of drugs used for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in a Sicilian primary care setting) from the Italian Drug Agency/Sicilian Regional during the conduct of the study; participation on advisory boards for Sandoz, Hospira, Sanofi, Biogen, Ibsen and Shire, consultancy for Otsuka, acting as the principal investigator of studies funded by Amgen, AstraZeneca, Daiichi Sankyo and IBSA, and coordinator of a master's degree that received unconditional grants from several pharmaceutical companies, outside the submitted work., (Copyright ©ERS 2020.)