应用生理学实验室中肺活量计用VMM涡轮机的评估。

Evaluation of the VMM turbine for spirometry in the applied physiology laboratory.

作者信息

Smith W D, Cunningham D A, Paterson D H, Rechnitzer P A

机构信息

Derriford Hospital, Plymouth, England.

出版信息

Can J Appl Physiol. 1993 Sep;18(3):317-24. doi: 10.1139/h93-027.

DOI:10.1139/h93-027

PMID:8242009

Abstract

The volume measurement module turbine (VMM) was evaluated in 51 subjects for spirometry in applied physiology against the Stead-Wells spirometer (SW) and Wright peak flow meter (WM). The volume and flow ranges (VMM) were, FEV1 1.32 to 3.94 L (mean 2.62, confidence interval [CI] 2.46 to 2.78); forced vital capacity (FVC) 1.97 to 5.06 L (mean 3.50, CI 3.29 to 3.71); and peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR) 290 to 624 L.min-1 (mean 434, CI 407 to 461). The mean difference for FEV1 was 0.09 L (CI 0.05 to 0.14), FVC 0.04 L (CI -0.02 to 0.10), and PEFR 18.0 L min-1 (CI 8.7 to 27.3) less than SW or WM. Bias with FEV1 and FVC was not significant, though PEFR demonstrated a significant proportional error. The repeatability coefficients for FEV1 and FVC were 0.18 and 0.20, comparable to the SW; but for PEFR they were greater, 58.4 versus 33.8 L.min-1 by WM. The VMM turbine is accurate and reliable for the measurement of FEV1 and FVC over the ranges studied; however, care should be taken when interpreting PEFR.

摘要

对51名受试者的容量测量模块涡轮机（VMM）进行了应用生理学肺活量测定评估，对照的是Stead-Wells肺活量计（SW）和赖特峰值流量计（WM）。VMM的容量和流量范围为：第1秒用力呼气量（FEV1）1.32至3.94升（平均2.62，置信区间[CI]2.46至2.78）；用力肺活量（FVC）1.97至5.06升（平均3.50，CI 3.29至3.71）；以及呼气峰值流速（PEFR）290至624升·分钟-1（平均434，CI 407至461）。与SW或WM相比，FEV1的平均差异为0.09升（CI 0.05至0.14），FVC为0.04升（CI -0.02至0.10），PEFR为18.0升·分钟-1（CI 8.7至27.3）。FEV1和FVC的偏差不显著，不过PEFR显示出显著的比例误差。FEV1和FVC的重复性系数分别为0.18和0.20，与SW相当；但PEFR的重复性系数更大，VMM涡轮机为58.4，WM为33.8升·分钟-1。在所研究的范围内，VMM涡轮机对FEV1和FVC的测量准确可靠；然而，在解释PEFR时应谨慎。