Hankinson J L, Crapo R O
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Division of Respiratory Disease Studies, Morgantown, WV 26505, USA.
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 1995 Aug;152(2):696-701. doi: 10.1164/ajrccm.152.2.7633728.
The American Thoracic Society (ATS) has recommended the use of 24 volume-time waveforms for the testing of spirometers. Although these waveforms include values of peak expiratory flow (PEF), they were not originally intended to test PEF meters, but, rather, volume parameters for spirometers. In addition, the practice of using ATS volume-time Waveform 24 with varying multiplying factors does not provide the range of flow-time waveform shapes (rise times) needed to evaluate PEF meters. Accordingly, we have developed a set of 26 flow-time waveforms specifically selected to evaluate PEF meters. PEF and other flow parameters (rise time and time to PEF) can be directly measured from these flow-time waveforms. When PEF determined directly from the flow-time curve was compared with PEF determined indirectly from a volume-time curve (ATS-recommended algorithm with an 80 ms time segment), as much as a 10.7% difference between the two methods was observed using a waveform with a fast rise time. In contrast, there was very little difference between the various methods of deriving PEF for waveforms with slower rise times. These 26 flow-time waveforms provide a means of defining PEF for the testing of software algorithms and the testing of PEF meters with computer-driven mechanical pumps.
美国胸科学会（ATS）推荐使用24个容积-时间波形来测试肺量计。尽管这些波形包含呼气峰值流速（PEF）值，但它们最初并非用于测试PEF测量仪，而是用于测试肺量计的容积参数。此外，使用不同乘数因子的ATS容积-时间波形24的做法并不能提供评估PEF测量仪所需的流速-时间波形形状（上升时间）范围。因此，我们开发了一组26个流速-时间波形，专门用于评估PEF测量仪。PEF和其他流速参数（上升时间和达到PEF的时间）可直接从这些流速-时间波形中测量。当将直接从流速-时间曲线确定的PEF与从容积-时间曲线间接确定的PEF（采用80毫秒时间段的ATS推荐算法）进行比较时，使用快速上升时间的波形，两种方法之间观察到高达10.7%的差异。相比之下，对于上升时间较慢的波形，各种推导PEF的方法之间差异很小。这26个流速-时间波形为测试软件算法和使用计算机驱动的机械泵测试PEF测量仪定义PEF提供了一种方法。
