Gonzalez H, Haller B, Watson H L, Sackner M A
Am Rev Respir Dis. 1984 Aug;130(2):171-4. doi: 10.1164/arrd.1984.130.2.171.
We assessed the accuracy of the respiratory inductive plethysmograph in the supine position to spirometry by the two-body position, least squares calibration and single-body position, isovolume calibration procedures. The comparison was carried out simultaneously in normal subjects breathing naturally and with voluntarily controlled abdominal or thoracic breathing, and in patients with COPD breathing naturally and with voluntarily controlled abdominal breathing patterns. In both groups, there was no significant difference in estimation of tidal volume between the 2 calibration procedures for the various breathing patterns. There was greater deviation from spirometric tidal volume values for both calibration methods in patients with COPD during abdominal than during natural breathing. In the normal subjects, agreement between the rib cage and abdominal partitioning of tidal volume for both calibration methods was good, but in the patients with COPD there was greater variability. In normal subjects, over a wide range of rib cage and abdominal compartmental contributions to tidal volume, either calibration procedure appears satisfactory. For patients with COPD, if large changes occur in the distribution of rib cage and abdominal contributions to tidal volume, then validation of respiratory inductive plethysmography to spirometry must be rechecked.
我们通过双体位、最小二乘法校准以及单体位、等容校准程序,评估了仰卧位呼吸感应体积描记器与肺活量测定法相比的准确性。在正常受试者自然呼吸以及自主控制腹部或胸部呼吸时,以及慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)患者自然呼吸以及自主控制腹部呼吸模式时,同时进行了比较。在两组中,对于各种呼吸模式,两种校准程序在潮气量估计方面均无显著差异。在COPD患者中,腹部呼吸时两种校准方法与肺活量测定潮气量值的偏差均大于自然呼吸时。在正常受试者中,两种校准方法在潮气量的胸廓和腹部划分之间的一致性良好,但在COPD患者中变异性更大。在正常受试者中,在胸廓和腹部对潮气量的贡献范围很广的情况下,两种校准程序似乎都令人满意。对于COPD患者,如果胸廓和腹部对潮气量的贡献分布发生较大变化,则必须重新检查呼吸感应体积描记法与肺活量测定法的验证情况。