Your new experience awaits. Try the new design now and help us make it even better

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Front. Med.

Sec. Pulmonary Medicine

Volume 12 - 2025 | doi: 10.3389/fmed.2025.1623378

Cross-sectional evaluation of patients with refractory or unexplained chronic cough by office-based pulmonologists in Germany

Provisionally accepted
Peter  KardosPeter Kardos1*Heinrich  WorthHeinrich Worth2Ulrich  KoehlerUlrich Koehler3Martin  HorackMartin Horack4Barbara  KarmannBarbara Karmann5Christina  JannowitzChristina Jannowitz5Adrian  GillissenAdrian Gillissen6
  • 1Lungenzentrum Frankfurt, Friedberger Anlage 31-32, 60316 Frankfurt am Main, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
  • 2Pneumologische & Kardiologische Praxisgemeinschaft, Bahnhofplatz 6, Fürth, Germany
  • 3Schlafmedizinisches Zentrum, Klinik für Pneumologie, Universitätsklinikum Marburg, Marburg, Germany
  • 4Institut Herzinfarktforschung, Ludwigshafen, Germany
  • 5MSD Sharp & Dohme GmbH, Medical Department, Levelingstraße 4a, 81673 München, München, Germany
  • 6Klinikum Stuttgart – Katharinenhospital, Department of Pulmonary Medicine and Intensive Care, Stuttgart, Germany

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

Background: Chronic cough (CC) is common in clinical practice, with refractory chronic cough (RCC) and unexplained chronic cough (UCC) being defined by guidelines from the European Respiratory Society, German Respiratory Society (DGP), and German Society of General Practice and Family Medicine (DEGAM) as separate entities. This study aimed to investigate the prevalence of RCC/UCC in an outpatient setting of pulmonologists.Methods: This cross-sectional observational study was conducted in 16 pulmonologists' offices in Germany. Adult patients with a specialist's diagnosis of RCC or UCC and who provided informed consent were included. Active smokers were excluded.Results: Of 22,140 consecutive out-patients screened, 421 were eligible for general analysis, and 226 met the RCC/UCC criteria per DGP guidelines for prevalence analysis. Among the 421 patients, 71.3% were female, 77.9% had therapy-resistant chronic cough (TRCC), and 22.1% had UCC. The main causes of TRCC were otherwise controlled asthma (59.1%) and gastroesophageal reflux disease (19.1%). Diagnosis had been established on average 6.4 ±7.6 years prior. Common medications included inhaled corticosteroids (ICS/LABA: 45.6%, ICS mono: 26.8%), and herbal antitussives (23.3%). Codeine was used in 4.3% and morphine in 0.7%. Non-drug therapies like physiotherapy were infrequently used. Prevalence projections for RCC/UCC in Germany were 0.21% and 0.64%, based on different models. Conclusions: This study, the first in a secondary care setting in Germany to determine RCC/UCC prevalence in outpatients, found a higher prevalence in women and a long history of suffering. These findings underscore the need for improved diagnostic procedures and new therapeutic developments for RCC/UCC. Key limitations include the potential impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on data collection, a relatively small UCC sample, and potential referral bias due to the secondary care setting.

Keywords: chronic cough, prevalence of subtypes, causes, actual management, Observational study

Received: 05 May 2025; Accepted: 16 Jul 2025.

Copyright: © 2025 Kardos, Worth, Koehler, Horack, Karmann, Jannowitz and Gillissen. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

* Correspondence: Peter Kardos, Lungenzentrum Frankfurt, Friedberger Anlage 31-32, 60316 Frankfurt am Main, Frankfurt am Main, Germany

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.