Pretto J J, Rochford P D, Pierce R J
Department of Thoracic Medicine, Repatriation General Hospital Heidelberg, Vic.
Med J Aust. 1990 Apr 2;152(7):358-61. doi: 10.5694/j.1326-5377.1990.tb125184.x.
This study was designed to evaluate the Breath-Taker peak flow meter, recently released by the Asthma Foundation of Victoria. The performance characteristics of five Breath-Taker units were compared with those of five Wright and five mini-Wright peak flow meters. The between-unit reproducibility of each type of peak flow meter was measured using an explosive decompression device with a peak flow reproducibility of better than 1%. Each individual meter was used to measure the peak flow delivered by the decompression device three times for each of six flow rates (97-622 L/min). The coefficient of variation (CV) was lowest for the Wright meters (mean CV, 4.8%) and, similarly to the Breath-Taker units (mean CV, 8.4%), this decreased with increasing flow. The CV of the mini-Wright meters, however, increased as flow increased (mean CV, 7.5%). The Breath-Taker meter had less inter-unit variability than the mini-Wright meter at peak flows above 200 L/min. The accuracy of the three meter types was assessed by comparing measurements of peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR) made with each type and also with a computerized pneumotachograph system in 30 subjects with various degrees of irreversible airflow obstruction. Each subject performed at least three reproducible PEFR manoeuvres on the pneumotachograph and on each type of meter, in randomized order. The results showed that in comparison with the pneumotachograph system the Breath-Taker meter underestimated PEFRs by a mean of 27 L/min and the mini-Wright meter overestimated PEFRs by a mean of 45 L/min, whereas the Wright meter was not significantly different. Since the differences between the Breath-Taker meter and the pneumotachograph were independent of flow rate, a scale offset would suffice to "correct" the Breath-Taker readings.
本研究旨在评估维多利亚哮喘基金会最近发布的“呼吸终结者”峰值流量计。将五个“呼吸终结者”装置的性能特征与五个赖特峰值流量计和五个微型赖特峰值流量计的性能特征进行了比较。使用具有优于1%的峰值流量重现性的爆炸减压装置测量每种类型峰值流量计的装置间重现性。对于六种流速(97 - 622升/分钟)中的每一种,每个单独的流量计用于测量减压装置输送的峰值流量三次。赖特流量计的变异系数(CV)最低(平均CV,4.8%),与“呼吸终结者”装置类似(平均CV,8.4%),其随流速增加而降低。然而,微型赖特流量计的CV随流速增加而增加(平均CV,7.5%)。在峰值流量高于200升/分钟时,“呼吸终结者”流量计的装置间变异性小于微型赖特流量计。通过比较30名患有不同程度不可逆气流阻塞的受试者使用每种类型流量计以及计算机化呼吸流速仪系统测量的呼气峰值流速(PEFR),评估了这三种流量计类型的准确性。每个受试者以随机顺序在呼吸流速仪和每种类型的流量计上至少进行三次可重复的PEFR操作。结果表明,与呼吸流速仪系统相比,“呼吸终结者”流量计平均低估PEFR 27升/分钟,微型赖特流量计平均高估PEFR 45升/分钟,而赖特流量计无显著差异。由于“呼吸终结者”流量计与呼吸流速仪之间的差异与流速无关,一个刻度偏移就足以“校正”“呼吸终结者”的读数。