Bugiani M, Piccioni P, Carosso A, Arossa W, Bosia S, Luccoli L, Rampulla C
CPA, USSL, Torino, Italy.
Med Lav. 1993 Sep-Oct;84(5):362-72.
The aim of this study was to examine the discriminating power of six widely used, or recently introduced, reference values in the interpretation of pulmonary ventilation (FVC and FEV1) in occupational health surveys. These six reference values were applied to a sample of 400 Italian males; 200 of the sample were foundry workers and the other 200 were workers who were not occupationally exposed to dusts; 50% of each group were smokers. The relationship between the reference values and their capacity to discriminate between the workers occupationally exposed to dusts and the workers who smoked in each group was evaluated. The results showed very significant differences among the various reference values. Generally speaking these differences may be determined by the different selection criteria of the subjects under study, or may be a result of the different characteristics of the population included in the various studies. Our conclusions show the need for a critical approach to the use of reference values, particularly during screening tests.
本研究的目的是检验六种广泛使用或最近引入的参考值在职业健康调查中解释肺通气功能（用力肺活量FVC和第一秒用力呼气容积FEV1）时的鉴别能力。这六种参考值应用于400名意大利男性样本；样本中的200名是铸造工人，另外200名是未职业接触粉尘的工人；每组各有50%为吸烟者。评估了参考值与它们在鉴别职业接触粉尘的工人和每组中吸烟者的能力之间的关系。结果显示不同参考值之间存在非常显著的差异。一般来说，这些差异可能由所研究对象的不同选择标准决定，或者可能是不同研究中纳入人群的不同特征导致的。我们的结论表明，在使用参考值时，尤其是在筛查测试期间，需要采取审慎的方法。
