Suppr超能文献

正常志愿者中美国胸科学会(ATS)与欧盟迷你赖特峰流速仪的比较。

Comparison of the ATS versus EU Mini Wright peak flow meter in normal volunteers.

作者信息

Pesola Gene R, O'Donnell Pamela, Pesola Gene R, Pesola Helen R, Chinchilli Vernon M, Magari Robert T, Saari Arthur F

机构信息

Section of Pulmonary Disease, Department of Medicine, Harlem Hospital, Columbia University, New York, New York, USA.

出版信息

J Asthma. 2010 Dec;47(10):1067-71. doi: 10.3109/02770903.2010.514639. Epub 2010 Nov 1.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

The American Thoracic Society (ATS) and European Union (EU) have precise and accurate Mini Wright peak flow meters. The purpose of this investigation was to compare both 1) for accuracy using a pneumotachometer, 2) in volunteers to determine whether they are interchangeable, and 3) to spirometrically predicted peak flows.

METHODS

Lab testing: A pneumotachometer was connected in series with each peak flow meter and varying flows pushed through both meters for comparison. Human subjects: Nonsmoking adult volunteers did three standing peak flows. The order of peak flow meter used was random. The best of three efforts was used for analysis. The t-test, concordance correlation coefficient (CCC), Deming regression, and Bland-Altman plot were the analytic strategies used to determine agreement. Peak flow results were compared to spirometrically predicted values.

RESULTS

Fifty-seven volunteers, average age 37 ± 12 years and mean BMI 24.9 ± 2.5 years, were included. The average peak flows were different at 541 ± 114 and 526 ± 112 L/min for the ATS and EU meters, respectively (p < .01). Both peak flow meter values were significantly different than spirometrically predicted values of 483 ± 86 L/min (p < .01). The CCC was 0.98 (0.97-0.99) and regression revealed a slope and y-intercept consistent with 1 and 0, respectively. The Bland-Altman plot revealed no increase in scatter of values over the range of peak flows versus the difference with a mean bias of 15 ± 15 L/min. Laboratory testing revealed that the ATS and EU peak flow meters read 3.0 ± 2.1% above and -2.0 ± 1.5% below the comparison pneumotachometer, respectively. The pneumotachometer comparison was significantly different for both meters at p < .01, paired t-test.

CONCLUSIONS

The ATS peak flow meter reads 2.8% higher than the EU peak flow meter across a range of flows. Both meters have similar accuracy with a different bias compared with a pneumotachometer. Finally, both peak flow meters read slightly and significantly higher than spirometrically derived peak flows. Therefore, the peak flow meters are not interchangeable and both may obtain slightly higher values than those determined using current spirometrically derived prediction equations.

摘要

目的

美国胸科学会(ATS)和欧盟(EU)的小型赖特峰值流量计精确且准确。本研究的目的是比较:1)使用呼吸流速仪对比两者的准确性;2)在志愿者中确定它们是否可互换;3)与通过肺活量测定法预测的峰值流量进行比较。

方法

实验室测试:将呼吸流速仪与每个峰值流量计串联,通过两个流量计推送不同流量进行比较。人体受试者:非吸烟成年志愿者进行三次站立位峰值流量测量。使用峰值流量计的顺序是随机的。取三次测量中最佳值进行分析。采用t检验、一致性相关系数(CCC)、戴明回归和布兰德 - 奥特曼图作为分析策略来确定一致性。将峰值流量结果与通过肺活量测定法预测的值进行比较。

结果

纳入57名志愿者,平均年龄37±12岁,平均体重指数24.9±2.5。ATS和欧盟流量计的平均峰值流量分别为541±114和526±112升/分钟,两者不同(p <.01)。两个峰值流量计的值均与肺活量测定法预测值483±86升/分钟有显著差异(p <.01)。CCC为0.98(0.97 - 0.99),回归显示斜率和y轴截距分别与1和0一致。布兰德 - 奥特曼图显示,在峰值流量范围内,值的离散度没有增加,与平均偏差15±15升/分钟的差异相比。实验室测试显示,ATS和欧盟峰值流量计的读数分别比对照呼吸流速仪高3.0±2.1%和低 - 2.0±1.5%。配对t检验显示,两种流量计与呼吸流速仪的比较均有显著差异(p <.01)。

结论

在一系列流量范围内,ATS峰值流量计的读数比欧盟峰值流量计高2.8%。与呼吸流速仪相比,两种流量计具有相似的准确性,但偏差不同。最后,两种峰值流量计的读数均略高于且显著高于通过肺活量测定法得出的峰值流量。因此,峰值流量计不可互换,并且两者获得的值可能略高于使用当前通过肺活量测定法得出的预测方程所确定的值。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验