Categorizing patients with non-cystic fibrosis bronchiectasis (NCFB) according to disease similarities is beneficial to drawing connections between symptoms, treatments, and prognoses. Recognizing this need, scientists have developed two scoring systems: the FACED score and the Bronchiectasis Severity Index (BSI). A group of researchers from Macedonia sought to determine the level of agreement between these scores in order to give clinicians greater power in predicting patient outcomes based on bronchiectasis severity, and they found compatibility between the two scores.
The FACED score — which stands for Forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1), Age, Chronic colonization by Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Extension of the disease by radiological assessment, and Dyspnea (shortness of breath) — uses a five-point system to predict the probability of all-cause mortality within five years of seeing a clinician for bronchiectasis. The BSI uses a seven-point system based on the same factors of FACED, with the addition of body mass index and hospitalization and exacerbation in previous year, to predict the risk of NCFB patients experiencing mortality, hospitalization, and exacerbations.
These two scoring systems were compared head-to-head in the article, “Assessment of the Non-Cystic Fibrosis Bronchiectasis Severity: The FACED Score vs the Bronchiectasis Severity Index,” which was published in The Open Respiratory Medicine Journal and written by Dr. J. Minov and colleagues at the Institute for Occupational Health of R. Macedonia. To conduct the study, the team observed 37 patients with NCFB and evaluated the patients using the variables of the FACED score and BSI. Using these characterizations, the team determined if there was a difference between the diagnoses of bronchiectasis based on the index used for evaluation.
[adrotate group=”6″]
Out of 37 patients, 17 were diagnosed with mild bronchiectasis, 14 patients were diagnosed with moderate bronchiectasis, and 6 were diagnosed with severe bronchiectasis using the FACED score. When the BSI was used, 16 patients were diagnosed with a low risk, 17 patients were diagnosed with a moderate risk, and 7 patients were diagnosed with a high risk for experiencing mortality. To compare, the mean FACED score was 3.4 out of 5, and the mean BSI score was 6.4 out of 7.
“We found similar results by the assessment of the NCFB severity in regard to its prognosis by both the FACED score and the BSI,” wrote Dr. Minov. “Further studies determining how these scores may impact clinical practice are needed.”