Background: Nasal and pharyngeal symptoms are common in patients with obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) treated with nasal continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP). However, these symptoms are common in OSA patients even before the treatment. Objectives: Determine the impact of nasal CPAP on nasal and pharyngeal symptoms in OSA patients. Method: Thirty-five adult patients (28 males), age 54±10 years old, with OSA diagnosed by polissonography. All patients answered to a questionnaire about the presence and quantification of sneezing, rhinorrhea, nasal pruritus, obstruction and bleeding, nasal and pharyngeal dryness. The questionnaire was answered before and after at least three months of CPAP therapy. Results: The apnea-hypopnea index was 50±25 events per hour. Twenty six patients (74%) presented at least one naso-pharingeal symptom before treatment. Nasal obstruction was the most common symptom, being referred by 18 patients (51%). Among the patients that were initially assymptomatic (n=9), 78% developed adverse nasal reactions to CPAP. In contrast, among the patients that presented nasal symptoms before treatment, there was a significant reduction in nasal obstruction, nasal and throat dryness scores as well as nasal bleeding after CPAP therapy. Conclusions: Nasal na pharyngeal symptoms are frequent in OSAS patients. CPAP therapy may originate nasal symptoms in patients previously assymptomatic, as well as reduce the intensity of these symptoms in patients that are previously symptomatic.

Keywords: Obstructive sleep apnea syndrome. Nasal obstruction. Continuous positive airway pressure, compliance.

Objective: To determine the efficacy of using forced expiratory volume in six seconds (FEV6) as a surrogate for forced vital capacity (FVC) in the diagnostic screening for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) by comparing FEV1/FVC ratios with FEV1/FEV6 ratios. Methods: In November of 2003, on World COPD Day, we conducted a campaign of diagnostic screening for COPD. The participants completed the clinical questionnaire of the Global Initiative for Obstructive Lung Disease, and those who responded affirmatively to at least three questions underwent spirometry. Results: A total of 134 individuals responded to three questions affirmatively and underwent spirometry. Of those, 59 were excluded: 45 for being non-smokers and 14 due to the fact that their tests did not meet the American Thoracic Society criteria for satisfactory spirometry. The number of tests in which the FEV1/FEV6 ratio was below 70% was similar to that found for the FEV1/FVC ratio. The sensitivity of FEV1/FEV6 in diagnosing airway obstruction (defined as FEV1/FVC below 70%) was 92%, and its specificity was 99%. The positive predictive value was 100%, and the negative predictive value was 98%. The Kendall correlation test revealed r = 0.99 (p < 0.0001). The t-test for paired samples revealed a negative correlation: t = −5.93 (p < 0.0001). Conclusion: The FEV1/FEV6 proved efficient for use in the diagnostic screening for COPD. There is a strong correlation between FEV1/FVC and FEV1/FEV6.

Keywords: Pulmonary disease, Chronic obstructive; Diagnosis; Spirometry; Forced expiratory volume; Vital capacity.