Park Hye Jung, Rhee Chin Kook, Yoo Kwang Ha, Park Yong Bum
Department of Internal Medicine, Gangnam Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Tuberc Respir Dis (Seoul). 2021 Oct;84(4):274-281. doi: 10.4046/trd.2021.0016. Epub 2021 Mar 24.
The Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (KNHANES) is a well-designed survey to collect national data, which many researchers have used for their studies. In KNHANES, although portable spirometry was used, its reliability has not been verified.
We prospectively enrolled 58 participants from four Korean institutions. The participants were classified into normal pattern, obstructive pattern, and restrictive pattern groups according to their previous spirometry results. Lung function was estimated by conventional spirometry and portable spirometry, and the results were compared.
The intraclass correlation coefficients of forced vital capacity (FVC) (coefficient, 9.993; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.988-0.996), forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) (coefficient, 0.997; 95% CI, 0.995-0.998), FEV1/FVC ratio (coefficient, 0.995; 95% CI, 0.992-0.997), and forced expiratory flow at 25-75% (FEF25-75%; coefficient, 0.991; 95% CI, 0.984-0.994) were excellent (all p<0.001). In the subgroup analysis, the results of the three parameters were similar in all groups. In the overall and subgroup analyses, Pearson's correlation of all the parameters was also excellent in the total (coefficient, 0.986-0.994; p<0.001) and subgroup analyses (coefficient, 0.915-0.995; p<0.001). In the paired t-test, FVC, FEV1/FVC, and FEF25-75% estimated by the two instruments were statistically different. However, FEV1 was not significantly different.
Lung function estimated by portable spirometry was well-correlated with that estimated by conventional spirometry. Although the values had minimal differences between them, we suggest that the spirometry results from the KNHANES are reliable.
韩国国家健康与营养检查调查（KNHANES）是一项精心设计的用于收集全国数据的调查，许多研究人员已将其用于他们的研究。在KNHANES中，尽管使用了便携式肺活量测定法，但其可靠性尚未得到验证。
我们前瞻性地招募了来自四个韩国机构的58名参与者。根据他们之前的肺活量测定结果，将参与者分为正常模式、阻塞性模式和限制性模式组。通过传统肺活量测定法和便携式肺活量测定法评估肺功能，并比较结果。
用力肺活量（FVC）的组内相关系数（系数，9.993；95%置信区间[CI]，0.988 - 0.996）、第1秒用力呼气容积（FEV1）（系数，0.997；95%CI，0.995 - 0.998）、FEV1/FVC比值（系数，0.995；95%CI，0.992 - 0.997）和25% - 75%用力呼气流量（FEF25 - 75%；系数，0.991；95%CI，0.984 - 0.994）都非常好（所有p<0.001）。在亚组分析中，所有组中这三个参数的结果相似。在总体和亚组分析中，所有参数在总体（系数，0.986 - 0.994；p<0.001）和亚组分析（系数，0.915 - 0.995；p<0.001）中的Pearson相关性也非常好。在配对t检验中，两种仪器估计的FVC、FEV1/FVC和FEF25 - 75%在统计学上有差异。然而，FEV1没有显著差异。
便携式肺活量测定法估计的肺功能与传统肺活量测定法估计的肺功能相关性良好。尽管两者的值差异极小，但我们认为KNHANES的肺活量测定结果是可靠的。
