Gannon P F, Newton D T, Pantin C F, Burge P S
Occupational Lung Disease Unit, Birmingham Heartlands Hospital, UK.
Thorax. 1998 Sep;53(9):790-2. doi: 10.1136/thx.53.9.790.
The number of peak expiratory flow (PEF) readings required per day to assess diurnal variation accurately is not known; published studies have used between two and seven PEF readings per day. This study compares the diurnal variation calculated using 2-10 PEF readings per day.
All days with 10 readings were selected from a database of PEF records. For each day, diurnal variations calculated using 2-9 of the readings available were compared with that calculated using the full 10 PEF readings. Diurnal variation calculated using all 10 readings was taken as the true diurnal variation. When less than 10 readings were used the readings were evenly spaced over waking hours. Diurnal variation was calculated as maximum--minimum/predicted.
Two hundred and 25 days with 10 readings per day were selected from PEF records provided by 63 individuals. When only two PEF readings per day were used, the limits of agreement suggested a possible underestimate of true diurnal variation, calculated using all 10 readings, of 1.23-15.10%. The possible underestimate fell to 0.27-3.96% when calculated using four evenly spaced readings. Analysis of the timing of the highest PEF reading of the day was undertaken for rest and work days. This showed a mean (SD) timing of 13:56 (4:56 hours) for rest days and 11:47 (5:59 hours) for work days.
Clinically significant underestimates of true diurnal variation may be seen when only small numbers of PEF readings per day are used in its calculation. At and above four readings the results suggest that the underestimate becomes increasingly insignificant in terms of the diagnosis and treatment of asthma. Analysis of the timing of the highest PEF reading of the day showed a wide variation, precluding the ability to capture the true diurnal variation with just two or three carefully timed PEF readings per day. The authors suggests that at least four readings per day should be performed, evenly spaced during waking hours, to obtain an accurate assessment of diurnal variation in PEF.
准确评估每日呼气峰值流速(PEF)日间变化所需的每日读数数量尚不清楚;已发表的研究每天使用2至7次PEF读数。本研究比较了每天使用2至10次PEF读数计算出的日间变化。
从PEF记录数据库中选取所有有10次读数的日子。对于每一天,将使用2至9次可用读数计算出的日间变化与使用全部10次PEF读数计算出的日间变化进行比较。使用全部10次读数计算出的日间变化被视为真正的日间变化。当使用的读数少于10次时,这些读数在清醒时间内均匀分布。日间变化计算为最大值-最小值/预测值。
从63名个体提供的PEF记录中选取了225天,每天有10次读数。当每天仅使用2次PEF读数时,一致性界限表明,与使用全部10次读数计算出的真正日间变化相比,可能低估了1.23%至15.10%。当使用4次均匀分布的读数进行计算时,可能的低估降至0.27%至3.96%。对休息日和工作日当天最高PEF读数的时间进行了分析。结果显示,休息日的平均(标准差)时间为13:56(4:56小时),工作日为11:47(5:59小时)。
在计算PEF日间变化时,如果每天仅使用少量读数,可能会在临床上显著低估真正的日间变化。当读数为4次及以上时,结果表明,就哮喘的诊断和治疗而言,这种低估变得越来越微不足道。对当天最高PEF读数时间的分析显示差异很大,这使得无法仅通过每天两三次精心安排时间的PEF读数来捕捉真正的日间变化。作者建议,为了准确评估PEF的日间变化,每天至少应进行4次读数,且在清醒时间内均匀分布。