Introduction:

Forced spirometry is a diagnostic and prognostic tool in asthma and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD). The low use of the test is a problem that persists, particularly in the first level of care, generating underdiagnosis, and inadequate diagnosis of obstructive diseases. Learning the maneuver and interpretation of it is not a mandatory part of the academic program of medical students and residents routinely in many countries, including Mexico.

Objective:

To evaluate the possible reasons for the low use of spirometry in the first level of Care in Mexico and the impact of an educational program on the declarative an procedural learning of the test.

Material and methods:

Face-to-face training in spirometry, of 6 hours, was carried out to the staff of the primary care centers with the highest prevalence of acute respiratory infections in the Mexican Republic (phase I). Participants solved a survey about spirometry use before attending the course. Evaluation of 13 questions and a graphic interpretation exercise was applied before and after the session. They were instructed to deliver spirometry tests of biological controls to INER and receive feedback from pulmonologist. The staff that remained active was invited to become certified in spirometry based on NIOSH (phase II). The scores obtained pre and post-intervention during phase I were analyzed; as well as during phase II in the subgroup of participants who remained active.

Results:

579 subjects attended the phase I training. 397 (68.6%) solved the pre-course survey. 83.9 and 78.9% reported attending more than one patient with the diagnosis of Asthma or COPD, respectively. 53.8% requested none spirometry in their monthly consultation. Among the causes, 39.7% consider it very important do not know how to perform it and not to have the equipment to do the test (30.5%). After the course, a significant improvement in declarative knowledge was observed compared to the diagnostic evaluation. 53.85 (RIC 38.46-69.23) versus 23.08 (RIC 7.69-30.77) respectively. After 10 months (7.17-14.5), only 77 participants went to phase II and took the spirometry certification course (18 hours) demonstrating stability in the theoretical score despite the elapsed time and good quality scores in the theoretical and practical evaluations after the 2nd intervention.

Conclusion:

The knowledge about spirometry is minimal and poorly used in the primary care of our country. Possible causes are a lack of continuous training and infrastructure. After a short training, there is a significant improvement in the learning of the test, which is held months later and is reinforced with a second training of longer duration. However, after a year of follow-up, new staff replaced the original one in a large percentage. What makes it necessary to establish more cost-effective educational modalities as tele-education.