US race-neutral lung assessments to have profound effects, study finds
Send a link to a friend
[May 20, 2024]
By Nancy Lapid
(Reuters) - A guideline for U.S. doctors to ignore race in assessing
lung health will likely have profound effects beyond the intended
improvements in medical care, such as increasing disability payments and
disease diagnoses for Black patients while boosting their job
disqualifications, a study found on Sunday.
Asian and Black patients will move forward on U.S. lung transplant
waiting lists, with 4.3 fewer days of expected wait time, while Hispanic
and white candidates will move back, having to wait 1.1 days longer on
average, according to a report of the study in the New England Journal
of Medicine.
U.S. diagnoses of nonobstructive lung disorders, such as chronic
bronchitis, will likely jump 141% for Black patients and fall 69% for
white patients, the researchers found in the report presented at the
annual meeting in San Diego of the American Thoracic Society, the
premier society for lung doctors.
Annual disability payments for Black military veterans will likely rise
by more than $1 billion and fall by $500 million for white veterans, the
researchers estimated.
Black people had been assumed for hundreds of years to naturally have
smaller lungs than white people, meaning a given amount of air going
into and out of the lungs could appear to show impaired lung function in
white patients and normal function in Black patients.
Traditional race-based equations for interpreting the results of
spirometry, the most commonly used type of pulmonary function test,
therefore grew from the idea that "normal" differs by race.
Experts now believe smaller lung capacities in some nonwhite populations
may be due to environmental exposures to pollution, poor nutrition, and
other risk factors.
New, race-neutral equations for determining lung function - taking into
account height, age and gender but not race - aim to help correct such
inequities. The guideline advising use of race-neutral formulas was
issued last year by the thoracic society.
These equations "offer an opportunity to move beyond crude proxies like
race and the associated assumption that these differences in lung
function are benign," said Dr. Raj Manrai of Harvard Medical School in
Boston, the senior author of the study.
[to top of second column]
|
Clinical lead Doctor Al Story points to an x-ray showing a pair of
lungs infected with TB (tuberculosis) during an interview with
Reuters on board the mobile X-ray unit screening for TB in Ladbroke
Grove in London January 27, 2014. REUTERS/Luke MacGregor/File Photo
The results of the new equations
could be complex. If they reveal more severe lung impairment,
surgeons might be less likely to recommend potentially curative
surgeries, but this may prevent surgical complications in patients
who are at higher risk than previously recognized, the researchers
found.
The new research is the first large study to quantify the likely
effects of how the new equations will shift millions of people to
one side or another of eligibility thresholds for treatments and
socioeconomic benefits, said Dr. Meredith McCormack of the Johns
Hopkins University School of Medicine in Baltimore, Maryland, who
co-authored an accompanying editorial.
The study's analysis of data on more than 369,000 U.S. and British
residents found the new formulas would likely reclassify 12.5
million U.S. patients as having or not having various degrees of
breathing impairment.
The new equations will reclassify medical impairment ratings for
8.16 million people; eligibility for jobs, such as firefighter,
requiring a certain level of lung function for 2.28 million; grading
of chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases for 2.05 million; and
military disability compensation eligibility for 413,000, the
researchers estimated.
Changes to patients' classifications could affect their eligibility
for trials of new treatments, the researchers said.
The impact on medical outcomes and whether the advantages outweigh
the disadvantages will not be known for years, said Dr. David
Kaminsky of the University of Vermont Larner College of Medicine in
Burlington, who co-authored the editorial.
"We’re going to have to wait and see," Kaminsky said.
(Reporting by Nancy Lapid; Editing by Michele Gershberg and William
Mallard)
[© 2024 Thomson Reuters. All rights reserved.]This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Thompson Reuters is solely responsible for this content. |