Aggarwal Ashutosh N, Agarwal Ritesh
Department of Pulmonary Medicine, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India.
Respirology. 2007 Sep;12(5):759-62. doi: 10.1111/j.1440-1843.2007.01117.x.
The ATS/ERS Task Force on Lung Function Testing recently proposed guidelines for the interpretation of pulmonary function tests and suggested that a reduction in FEV(1) be used for categorizing both obstructive and restrictive abnormalities. This changes the severity stratification algorithm of restrictive patterns diagnosed by spirometry, that are currently categorized based on reduction in VC. This study examined the level of agreement between these two categorization schemes.
Spirometry records of 2,527 adult patients evaluated over 1 year were retrieved; 361 of these patients showed a restrictive pattern. Severity of airway restriction was separately assessed in these patients using the indicative schemes provided in the new ATS/ERS and the earlier ATS guidelines.
There were 212 (58.7%) patients with a restrictive pattern who had identical severity categorization using both guidelines. In most instances of discordance, the severity categorization differed only by a single stratum. Of 149 discordant results, 91 (60.1%) were placed in a better category, and 58 (39.9%) in a worse category, when using the new ATS/ERS recommendations. Overall weighted kappa estimate for agreement between the two schemes of categorization was 0.649.
Based on spirometry results, the level of severity of restriction cannot be described interchangeably between the old and new guidelines for all patients. The new guidelines tend to give lower severity scores for restrictive lung diseases in up to 25% of patients.
美国胸科学会/欧洲呼吸学会肺功能测试工作组最近提出了肺功能测试解读指南,并建议使用FEV₁降低来对阻塞性和限制性异常进行分类。这改变了通过肺活量测定法诊断的限制性模式的严重程度分层算法,目前该算法是基于VC降低进行分类的。本研究考察了这两种分类方案之间的一致性水平。
检索了在1年多时间里评估的2527例成年患者的肺活量测定记录;其中361例患者表现出限制性模式。使用新的美国胸科学会/欧洲呼吸学会指南和早期美国胸科学会指南中提供的指示性方案,分别评估这些患者气道受限的严重程度。
有212例(58.7%)表现出限制性模式的患者在两种指南下的严重程度分类相同。在大多数不一致的情况下,严重程度分类仅相差一个等级。在149个不一致的结果中,按照新的美国胸科学会/欧洲呼吸学会建议,91个(60.1%)被归为更好的类别,58个(39.9%)被归为更差的类别。两种分类方案之间一致性的总体加权kappa估计值为0.649。
基于肺活量测定结果,对于所有患者,旧指南和新指南不能互换描述限制性的严重程度水平。新指南在高达25%的患者中往往会给出更低的限制性肺病严重程度评分。