Swart François, Schuurmans Macé M, Heydenreich Johannes C, Pieper Clarissa H, Bolliger Chris T
Pulmonary Function Laboratory, Tygerberg Hospital, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Stellenbosch, Francie van Zijl Drive, 7505 Tygerberg, Cape Town, South Africa.
Respir Care. 2003 Jun;48(6):591-5.
The performance of spirometers is often evaluated under ideal conditions with computer-generated waveforms or in vivo testing with healthy subjects. Real-life conditions are less ideal because of comorbidities, age of the subjects, and a variety of air flow limitations. Evaluation of new spirometry equipment can also be performed under these less favorable conditions. The Spirospec is a new desktop spirometer that is commercially available, but its accuracy has not been evaluated in a clinical setting.
Test the Spirospec with subjects with normal and pathologic pulmonary function.
A group of 45 patients (mean age 38.4 years, 27 male) booked for evaluation in the pulmonary function laboratory of a tertiary care university hospital were tested with both a Spirospec and a standard Jaeger Masterlab 4.0 spirometer, according to the guidelines of the American Thoracic Society. Three subgroups (normal spirometry, obstructive air flow limitation, and restrictive air flow limitation) of 15 consecutive subjects each underwent spirometry.
Pulmonary function measurements from the Spirospec correlated closely (r = 0.95-0.99) with those from the Masterlab 4.0, showing good limits of agreement and differences between the 2 devices: forced vital capacity 0.03 L, forced expiratory volume in the first second (FEV(1)) -0.01 L, peak expiratory flow -0.41 L/s, peak inspiratory flow 0.43 L/s, forced expiratory flow at 50% of total lung capacity 0.13 L/s, and forced expiratory flow at 75% of total lung capacity 0.12 L/s. With the exception of forced vital capacity and FEV(1), these differences were statistically significant (p < 0.05).
The Spirospec is comparable to the Masterlab 4.0, with high accuracy for FEV(1) and forced vital capacity and clinically acceptable differences in the measured flow variables.
肺活量计的性能通常在理想条件下通过计算机生成的波形进行评估，或在健康受试者身上进行体内测试。由于存在合并症、受试者年龄以及各种气流限制，实际情况并不那么理想。新的肺活量计设备也可在这些不太有利的条件下进行评估。Spirospec是一种新的台式肺活量计，已投入商业使用，但其准确性尚未在临床环境中得到评估。
对肺功能正常和异常的受试者测试Spirospec。
根据美国胸科学会的指南，在一家三级护理大学医院的肺功能实验室对一组45名预定进行评估的患者（平均年龄38.4岁，男性27名）使用Spirospec和标准的耶格Masterlab 4.0肺活量计进行测试。三个亚组（肺量计正常、阻塞性气流受限和限制性气流受限）各有连续15名受试者接受肺量计检查。
Spirospec的肺功能测量值与Masterlab 4.0的测量值密切相关（r = 0.95 - 0.99），显示出良好的一致性界限以及两种设备之间的差异：用力肺活量为0.03 L，第一秒用力呼气量（FEV₁）为 -0.01 L，呼气峰值流速为 -0.41 L/s，吸气峰值流速为0.43 L/s，肺总量50%时的用力呼气流量为0.13 L/s，肺总量75%时的用力呼气流量为0.12 L/s。除用力肺活量和FEV₁外，这些差异具有统计学意义（p < 0.05）。
Spirospec与Masterlab 4.0相当，FEV₁和用力肺活量测量精度高，测量的流量变量在临床上具有可接受的差异。
