Zimmermann Sabine C, Watts Joanna C, Bertolin Amy, Jetmalani Kanika, King Gregory G, Thamrin Cindy
Woolcock Institute of Medical Research, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Department of Respiratory Medicine, Royal North Shore Hospital, Pacific Highway, St Leonards, NSW, 2065, Australia.
J Clin Monit Comput. 2018 Jun;32(3):509-512. doi: 10.1007/s10877-017-0050-y. Epub 2017 Jul 31.
The forced oscillation technique (FOT) is an emerging clinical lung function test, with commercial devices becoming increasingly available. However comparability across existing devices has not been established. We evaluated in vivo and in vitro measurements made using three commercial devices against a custom-built device (WIMR): Resmon Pro Diary (Restech srl, Italy), tremoFlo C-100 (Thorasys Medical Systems, Canada), Jaeger Masterscope CT IOS (CareFusion, Hoechberg, Germany). Respiratory system resistance Rrs and reactance Xrs at 5 Hz were examined in twelve healthy subjects (mean age 33 ± 11 years, 7 males), and in two test standards of known resistance and reactance. Subjects performed three measurements during tidal breathing on the four devices in random order. Total, inspiratory and expiratory Rrs and Xrs were calculated and compared using one-way repeated measures ANOVA and Bonferroni post-hoc tests. Rrs did not differ between devices, with <10% deviation from predicted, except for the IOS device. With Xrs, similar values were seen between the WIMR and Resmon devices and between the tremoFlo and IOS devices. No differences were observed using test standards; deviation from theoretical value was <2% for resistance and <5% for reactance. The WIMR, tremoFlo and Resmon Pro but not IOS devices measure similar Rrs, whereas there was more disparity across devices in the estimation of Xrs parameters. The discrepancy between in vivo and in vitro measurements suggest that FOT validation procedures need to take into account the breathing pattern, either using biological controls or a breathing model.
强迫振荡技术(FOT)是一种新兴的临床肺功能测试方法,市面上的相关商业设备越来越多。然而,现有设备之间的可比性尚未确立。我们针对一种定制设备(WIMR),评估了使用三种商业设备进行的体内和体外测量结果,这三种商业设备分别是:Resmon Pro Diary(意大利Restech srl公司)、tremoFlo C - 100(加拿大Thorasys医疗系统公司)、耶格Masterscope CT IOS(德国CareFusion公司,赫希贝格)。我们在12名健康受试者(平均年龄33±11岁,7名男性)以及两种已知阻力和电抗的测试标准中,检测了5Hz时的呼吸系统阻力Rrs和电抗Xrs。受试者在平静呼吸期间,以随机顺序在这四种设备上进行了三次测量。计算了总吸气和呼气时的Rrs和Xrs,并使用单向重复测量方差分析和Bonferroni事后检验进行比较。除了IOS设备外,各设备之间的Rrs没有差异,与预测值的偏差<10%。对于Xrs,WIMR和Resmon设备之间以及tremoFlo和IOS设备之间的值相似。使用测试标准未观察到差异;阻力与理论值的偏差<2%,电抗与理论值的偏差<5%。WIMR、tremoFlo和Resmon Pro设备(而非IOS设备)测量的Rrs相似,而在Xrs参数估计方面,各设备之间的差异更大。体内和体外测量结果之间的差异表明,FOT验证程序需要考虑呼吸模式,可使用生物对照或呼吸模型。