Miller M R, Dickinson S A, Hitchings D J
Department of Medicine, University of Birmingham, Good Hope Hospital, Sutton Coldfield, West Midlands.
Thorax. 1992 Nov;47(11):904-9. doi: 10.1136/thx.47.11.904.
The variability of peak expiratory flow (PEF) is now commonly used in the diagnosis and management of asthma. It is essential for PEF meters to have a linear response in order to obtain an unbiased measurement of PEF variability. As the accuracy and linearity of portable PEF meters have not been rigorously tested in recent years this aspect of their performance has been investigated.
The response of several portable PEF meters was tested with absolute standards of flow generated by a computer driven, servo controlled pump and their response was compared with that of a pneumotachograph.
For each device tested the readings were highly repeatable to within the limits of accuracy with which the pointer position can be assessed by eye. The between instrument variation in reading for six identical devices expressed as a 95% confidence limit was, on average across the range of flows, +/- 8.5 l/min for the Mini-Wright, +/- 7.9 l/min for the Vitalograph, and +/- 6.4 l/min for the Ferraris. PEF meters based on the Wright meter all had similar error profiles with overreading of up to 80 l/min in the mid flow range from 300 to 500 l/min. This overreading was greatest for the Mini-Wright and Ferraris devices, and less so for the original Wright and Vitalograph meters. A Micro-Medical Turbine meter was accurate up to 400 l/min and then began to underread by up to 60 l/min at 720 l/min. For the low range devices the Vitalograph device was accurate to within 10 l/min up to 200 l/min, with the Mini-Wright overreading by up to 30 l/min above 150 l/min.
Although the Mini-Wright, Ferraris, and Vitalograph meters gave remarkably repeatable results their error profiles for the full range meters will lead to important errors in recording PEF variability. This may lead to incorrect diagnosis and bias in implementing strategies of asthma treatment based on PEF measurement.
呼气峰值流速(PEF)变异性目前常用于哮喘的诊断和管理。为了获得无偏倚的PEF变异性测量结果,PEF测量仪具有线性响应至关重要。由于近年来便携式PEF测量仪的准确性和线性未经过严格测试,因此对其性能的这一方面进行了研究。
使用计算机驱动的伺服控制泵产生的绝对流量标准对几种便携式PEF测量仪的响应进行测试,并将其响应与呼吸流速计的响应进行比较。
对于测试的每个设备,读数在可通过肉眼评估指针位置的精度范围内具有高度可重复性。六个相同设备读数的仪器间差异以95%置信限表示,在整个流量范围内,Mini-Wright平均为±8.5升/分钟,Vitalograph为±7.9升/分钟,Ferraris为±6.4升/分钟。基于Wright测量仪的PEF测量仪都具有相似的误差曲线,在300至500升/分钟的中等流量范围内读数偏高可达80升/分钟。这种偏高在Mini-Wright和Ferraris设备中最为明显,而在原始Wright和Vitalograph测量仪中则较小。Micro-Medical涡轮测量仪在高达400升/分钟时准确,然后在720升/分钟时开始读数偏低高达60升/分钟。对于低流量范围的设备,Vitalograph设备在高达200升/分钟时准确在±10升/分钟以内,Mini-Wright在高于150升/分钟时读数偏高可达30升/分钟。
尽管Mini-Wright、Ferraris和Vitalograph测量仪给出了非常可重复的结果,但它们全量程测量仪的误差曲线将导致记录PEF变异性时出现重大误差。这可能导致基于PEF测量的哮喘治疗策略的诊断错误和偏差。