NICE vs BTS/SIGN: Management of COPD (2025) - A Clinical Comparison
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in the UK. For clinicians, two major national guidelines inform practice: the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guideline (last updated in 2019, with a 2024 addendum) and the British Thoracic Society (BTS) and Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) guideline, which merged into the BTS guideline in 2024. This comparison focuses on the current, actionable recommendations from both, highlighting key differences to aid clinical decision-making.
See how this translates to practice: Explore our Clinical governance features, visit the Patient Safety Hub, or review Clinical Safety & Assurance for enterprise rollout.
Key Overarching Difference: The NICE guideline is generally more prescriptive, offering specific treatment pathways and cut-off points. The BTS/SIGN (now BTS) guideline has traditionally been more pragmatic, often emphasising patient-centred outcomes and clinical judgement over strict algorithms. The 2024 BTS guideline continues this trend, integrating new evidence on inhaler choice and sustainability.
Diagnosis and Assessment
NICE (NG115, 2019)
- Spirometry Criteria: Diagnosis requires a post-bronchodilator FEV1/FVC ratio of less than 0.7. This fixed ratio is a cornerstone of the NICE diagnostic approach.
- Severity Classification: Uses a three-category system based on FEV1 % predicted: Mild (>80%), Moderate (50-79%), Severe (30-49%), Very Severe (<30%).
- Assessment Focus: Strong emphasis on quantifying the impact of symptoms using validated tools like the COPD Assessment Test (CAT) or the Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ). This directly informs the initial treatment strategy.
- Comorbidities: Highlights the importance of assessing for and managing common comorbidities, such as cardiovascular disease and osteoporosis.
BTS/SIGN (BTS 2024 Guideline)
- Spirometry Criteria: Acknowledges the limitations of the fixed 0.7 ratio, especially in older adults where it can lead to over-diagnosis. It suggests that using the Lower Limit of Normal (LLN) may be more appropriate, though the fixed ratio remains widely used in practice.
- Severity Classification: Also uses FEV1 % predicted but places less emphasis on this number alone for guiding therapy. Greater focus is on the overall clinical picture.
- Assessment Focus: Emphasises a holistic assessment, including symptom burden, exacerbation history, exercise capacity, and the impact on the patient's life. The MRC dyspnoea scale is frequently referenced.
- Comorbidities: Similarly stresses the high prevalence of comorbidities and the need for an integrated care approach.
Practical Takeaway: The diagnostic spirometric criterion (0.7 vs. LLN) is a theoretical difference; in daily practice, the fixed ratio is ubiquitous. The key distinction is that NICE more rigidly links the FEV1 severity grade and symptom score to a treatment matrix, while BTS encourages a broader, more individualised assessment from the outset.
Pharmacological Management: Stable COPD
This is the area of most significant practical difference, particularly regarding inhaler selection.
NICE (NG115 & 2024 Addendum)
- Structured Pathway: NICE provides a clear stepwise algorithm based on the patient's FEV1 severity, symptom burden (CAT score), and exacerbation history.
- Initial Treatment: For patients with a CAT score ≥10, the first-line treatment is a LAMA + LABA dual-bronchodilator therapy. A SABA or SAMA is only recommended if the CAT score is <10.
- Triple Therapy (ICS/LAMA/LABA): Reserved for patients with an FEV1 < 50% predicted who have had 2 or more exacerbations per year (or one requiring hospitalisation) and who have asthmatic features/raised eosinophils. The 2024 addendum strengthened the role of eosinophil count (≥300 cells/μl) in identifying those most likely to benefit from ICS.
- Inhaler Choice: The 2024 addendum introduced a major change: it recommends that the choice of inhaler device should be primarily guided by the patient's ability to use the device correctly, with a strong preference for dry powder inhalers (DPIs) or soft mist inhalers (SMIs) over pressurised metered-dose inhalers (pMDIs) due to the lower greenhouse gas potential of the former, where clinically appropriate.
BTS/SIGN (BTS 2024 Guideline)
- Less Algorithmic: Offers principles rather than a strict flowchart. Treatment is tailored to the dominant problem: breathlessness or exacerbations.
- Initial Treatment: For breathlessness, a LAMA or LABA is suggested as initial therapy, with a preference for LAMA if the patient has a history of exacerbations. Dual therapy (LAMA+LABA) is recommended if symptoms persist on a single agent.
- Triple Therapy (ICS/LAMA/LABA): Recommendations are similar to NICE but are framed around exacerbation risk rather than a strict FEV1 cut-off. It strongly emphasises that ICS should be avoided in non-exacerbating patients due to the risk of pneumonia.
- Inhaler Choice: The 2024 guideline places a significant and direct emphasis on environmental impact. It recommends that clinicians should switch patients from pMDIs to low-global-warming-potential (GWP) alternatives (DPIs, SMIs) where feasible and safe, as a default option for new prescriptions and at review.
Practical Takeaway: NICE starts with dual therapy for more symptomatic patients, while BTS often starts with a single agent. Both now agree on the critical importance of inhaler sustainability. The BTS guideline is more assertive in making low-GWP devices the default choice, whereas NICE frames it as a strong preference. Eosinophil-guided ICS use is a key feature of both modern guidelines.
Management of Exacerbations and Special Situations
Exacerbations
- NICE: Recommends oral corticosteroids (e.g., prednisolone 30mg daily for 7-14 days) and antibiotics (if sputum purulence is present) for community-managed exacerbations.
- BTS: Similar recommendations, but often suggests a shorter 5-day course of prednisolone (e.g., 30mg for 5 days) as being equally effective. Antibiotic choice should be guided by local formularies and resistance patterns.
Pulmonary Rehabilitation (PR)
- Both guidelines strongly recommend PR for all patients who are functionally impaired by COPD (MRC dyspnoea scale ≥3). It is a cornerstone of non-pharmacological management.
Oxygen Therapy
- Both guidelines are aligned. Long-term oxygen therapy (LTOT) is for patients with a PaO2 ≤ 7.3 kPa when stable, or ≤ 8.0 kPa with evidence of peripheral oedema or polycythaemia. Ambulatory oxygen should be assessed for patients who desaturate on exercise.
End-of-Life Care
- NICE: Has a specific section on palliative care and managing breathlessness at the end of life, including the use of opioids and benzodiazepines.
- BTS: Also addresses palliative approaches, emphasising advance care planning and the management of refractory symptoms.
Practical Clinical Flow: A Synthesis
For a newly diagnosed patient with COPD (CAT ≥10):
- Confirm Diagnosis: Post-bronchodilator FEV1/FVC < 0.7.
- Assess Holistically: Symptoms (CAT/MRC), exacerbation history, exercise tolerance, comorbidities, and inhaler technique.
- Initiate Treatment (Synthesised View):
- Consider a LAMA+LABA dual therapy for significant breathlessness (aligning with NICE) or a LAMA if exacerbations are a concern (aligning with BTS principles).
- Prescribe a DPI or SMI by default unless the patient cannot use it effectively, in which case a pMDI is appropriate.
- Review and Escalate: If exacerbations persist despite dual therapy, check blood eosinophil count. If ≥300/μl, add ICS (Triple Therapy). If low, consider alternatives like Roflumilast or Azithromycin (if specific criteria met).
- Non-Pharmacological: Refer all eligible patients to Pulmonary Rehabilitation. Offer smoking cessation support at every opportunity.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
1. Which guideline should I follow in my NHS practice?
Both are nationally recognised. Local NHS Trust formularies and care pathways often synthesise elements from both. It is essential to be familiar with the recommendations of both to understand the rationale behind local protocols. The choice may sometimes come down to a more structured (NICE) versus a more flexible (BTS) approach for individual patients.
2. What is the single biggest difference in 2025?
The most pressing operational difference is the emphasis on environmentally sustainable inhalers. The BTS 2024 guideline is more direct in advocating for a switch away from pMDIs where possible. This is a rapidly evolving area that will increasingly influence prescribing.
3. How do I decide between single, dual, or triple therapy?
Use a hybrid approach: Let symptom burden (e.g., CAT score) and exacerbation history be your primary guides, as per NICE. Use the FEV1 and eosinophil count (≥300/μl) as key decision modifiers for considering ICS, as recommended by both guidelines.
4. A patient is stable on a pMDI. Should I switch them to a DPI?
Yes, this should be actively considered at the next review. Assess the patient's ability and preference for a different device. Ensure they can use the new device correctly and provide a placebo trainer for practice. The switch must be safe and effective for the patient, but the environmental imperative is now a core part of clinical responsibility.
5. Are the guidelines likely to converge in the future?
With the merger of SIGN into BTS, the UK now has two major guidelines: NICE and BTS. While they draw on the same evidence base, their philosophical differences may persist. However, on critical new evidence points (like eosinophil counts and inhaler sustainability), they are becoming more aligned.
Source Links
- NICE Guideline NG115 (2019, updated 2024): NICE NG115
- BTS Guideline for the management of COPD (2024): BTS guideline: COPD (Note: This supersedes the previous BTS/SIGN 2019 guideline).