Suppr超能文献

比较健康成年人报告肺量计参数的替代选择方法。

A comparison of alternative selection methods for reporting spirometric parameters in healthy adults.

机构信息

Airborne Hazards and Burn Pits Center of Excellence, War Related Illness and Injury Study Center, VA New Jersey Health Care System, East Orange, NJ, USA.

Rowan University School of Osteopathic Medicine, Stratford, NJ, USA.

出版信息

Sci Rep. 2021 Jul 22;11(1):14945. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-94120-9.

Abstract

Alternative methods have been proposed to report spirometry indices from test sessions (forced expiratory volume 1 s, FEV; forced vital capacity, FVC). However, most use the American and European Societies' standard (ATS/ERS) which stops sessions once a repeatability threshold is met which may not accurately represent intra-session variability. Our goal was to repeat trials beyond the repeatability threshold and evaluate alternative reporting methods. 130 adults performed spirometry across two visits. Spirometry indices were reported using the ATS/ERS standard and four alternatives. 78 participants (60%) had valid data for all methods and visits. Intra-session coefficients of variation were low (FEV: 3.1-3.7%; FVC: 2.3-2.8%). Our four alternative methods yielded FEV and FVC values ≤ 0.08 L different from ATS/ERS standard, which is not clinically meaningful. Intraclass correlation coefficients were ≥ 0.97 indicating consistency across repeated measures. The smallest real differences ranged from FEV: 0.20-0.27 L and FVC: 0.18-0.24 L indicating consistency and low measurement error. Overall, all methods for reporting FEV and FVC demonstrated similar measurement error, precision, and stability within- and between-visits. These results suggest that once ATS/ERS repeatability is achieved, which approach is used for reporting spirometric variables may be of low clinical significance in a healthy population.

摘要

已经提出了替代方法来报告测试期间的肺活量测定指数(1 秒用力呼气量,FEV;用力肺活量,FVC)。然而,大多数方法都使用美国和欧洲呼吸学会的标准(ATS/ERS),一旦达到重复性阈值,就会停止测试,这可能无法准确反映测试期间的变异性。我们的目标是在重复性阈值之外重复试验,并评估替代报告方法。130 名成年人在两次就诊期间进行了肺活量测定。使用 ATS/ERS 标准和四种替代方法报告肺活量测定指数。78 名参与者(60%)有所有方法和就诊的有效数据。测试期间的变异系数较低(FEV:3.1-3.7%;FVC:2.3-2.8%)。我们的四种替代方法得出的 FEV 和 FVC 值与 ATS/ERS 标准相差≤0.08 L,这没有临床意义。组内相关系数≥0.97,表明重复测量之间具有一致性。最小真实差异范围为 FEV:0.20-0.27 L 和 FVC:0.18-0.24 L,表明一致性和低测量误差。总体而言,报告 FEV 和 FVC 的所有方法在就诊内和就诊间均表现出相似的测量误差、精密度和稳定性。这些结果表明,一旦达到 ATS/ERS 重复性,用于报告肺活量测定变量的方法在健康人群中可能具有较低的临床意义。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0f2a/8298454/d4d0a77eea88/41598_2021_94120_Fig1_HTML.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验