Literature DB >> 12324671

Interpretation of occupational peak flow records: level of agreement between expert clinicians and Oasys-2.

D R Baldwin1, P Gannon, P Bright, D T Newton, A Robertson, K Venables, B Graneek, R D Barker, A Cartier, J-L Malo, M Wilsher, C F A Pantin, P S Burge.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Oasys-2 is a validated diagnostic aid for occupational asthma that interprets peak expiratory flow (PEF) records as well as generating summary plots. The system removes inconsistency in interpretation, which is important if there is limited agreement between experts. A study was undertaken to assess the level of agreement between expert clinicians interpreting serial PEF measurements in relation to work exposure and to compare the responses given by Oasys-2.
METHOD: 35 PEF records from workers under investigation for suspected occupational asthma were available for review. Records included details of nature of work, intercurrent illness, drug therapy, predicted PEF, rest periods, and holidays. Simple plots of PEF and the Oasys-2 generated plots were available. Experts were advised that approximately 1 hour was available to review the records. They were asked to score each work-rest-work (WRW) period and each rest-work-rest (RWR) period for evidence of occupational effect. At the end of each record scores of 0-100% were given for evidence of "asthma" and "occupational effect" for the whole record. Kappa values were calculated for each scored period and for the opinions on the whole record. The scores were converted into four groups (0-25%, 26-50%, 51-75%, 76-100%) and two groups (0-50% and 51-100%) for analysis. This is relevant to scores produced by Oasys-2. Agreement between Oasys-2 scores and each expert was calculated.
RESULTS: 24 of 35 records were analysed by seven experts in the allotted time. For whole record occupational effect, median kappa values were 0.83 (range 0.56-0.94) for two groups and 0.62 (0.11-0.83) for four groups. For asthma, median kappa values were 0.58 (0-0.67) and 0.42 (0.15-0.70) for two and four groups respectively. For all WRW and RWR periods kappa values were 0.84 (0.42-0.94) and 0.70 (0.46-0.87) respectively. Agreement between Oasys-2 and individual experts showed a median kappa value of 0.75 (0.50-0.92) for two groups and 0.50 (0.39-0.70) for four groups. Kappa values for the median expert score v Oasys-2 were 0.75 for two groups and 0.67 for four groups. Agreement was poor for records with intermediate probability, as defined by Oasys-2.
CONCLUSION: Considerable variation in agreement was seen in expert interpretation of occupational PEF records which may lead to inconsistencies in diagnosis of occupational asthma. There is a need for an objective scoring system which removes human variability, such as that provided by Oasys-2.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12324671      PMCID: PMC1746200          DOI: 10.1136/thorax.57.10.860

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Thorax        ISSN: 0040-6376            Impact factor:   9.139


  10 in total

1.  Comparison of serial monitoring of peak expiratory flow and FEV1 in the diagnosis of occupational asthma.

Authors:  C Leroyer; L Perfetti; C Trudeau; J L'Archevĕque; M Chan-Yeung; J L Malo
Journal:  Am J Respir Crit Care Med       Date:  1998-09       Impact factor: 21.405

Review 2.  Occupational lung disease. 8. The diagnosis of occupational asthma from serial measurements of lung function at and away from work.

Authors:  P Bright; P S Burge
Journal:  Thorax       Date:  1996-08       Impact factor: 9.139

3.  Development of OASYS-2: a system for the analysis of serial measurement of peak expiratory flow in workers with suspected occupational asthma.

Authors:  P F Gannon; D T Newton; J Belcher; C F Pantin; P S Burge
Journal:  Thorax       Date:  1996-05       Impact factor: 9.139

4.  On observing patterns of airflow obstruction in chronic asthma.

Authors:  M Turner-Warwick
Journal:  Br J Dis Chest       Date:  1977-04

5.  Do subjects investigated for occupational asthma through serial peak expiratory flow measurements falsify their results?

Authors:  J L Malo; C Trudeau; H Ghezzo; J L'Archevêque; A Cartier
Journal:  J Allergy Clin Immunol       Date:  1995-11       Impact factor: 10.793

6.  How many times per day should peak expiratory flow rates be assessed when investigating occupational asthma?

Authors:  J L Malo; J Côté; A Cartier; L P Boulet; J L'Archevêque; M Chan-Yeung
Journal:  Thorax       Date:  1993-12       Impact factor: 9.139

7.  Peak expiratory flow monitoring is not a reliable method for establishing the diagnosis of occupational asthma.

Authors:  S Quirce; G Contreras; A Dybuncio; M Chan-Yeung
Journal:  Am J Respir Crit Care Med       Date:  1995-09       Impact factor: 21.405

8.  Peak flow rate records in surveys: reproducibility of observers' reports.

Authors:  K M Venables; P S Burge; A G Davison; A J Newman Taylor
Journal:  Thorax       Date:  1984-11       Impact factor: 9.139

Review 9.  Assessment of peak expiratory flow in asthma.

Authors:  J L Malo
Journal:  Curr Opin Pulm Med       Date:  1996-01       Impact factor: 3.155

10.  Variability in the classification of radiographs using the 1980 International Labor Organization Classification for Pneumoconioses.

Authors:  L S Welch; K L Hunting; J Balmes; E A Bresnitz; T L Guidotti; J E Lockey; T Myo-Lwin
Journal:  Chest       Date:  1998-12       Impact factor: 9.410

  10 in total
  11 in total

1.  An Oasys for occupational asthma.

Authors:  Jeremy Beach; Harold Hoffman
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2003-08-05       Impact factor: 8.262

Review 2.  Diagnosis of occupational asthma: an update.

Authors:  Edgardo J Jares; Carlos E Baena-Cagnani; R Maximiliano Gómez
Journal:  Curr Allergy Asthma Rep       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 4.806

Review 3.  Review of Diagnostic Challenges in Occupational Asthma.

Authors:  Jacques A Pralong; Andre Cartier
Journal:  Curr Allergy Asthma Rep       Date:  2017-01       Impact factor: 4.806

Review 4.  Evidence based guidelines for the prevention, identification, and management of occupational asthma.

Authors:  P J Nicholson; P Cullinan; A J Newman Taylor; P S Burge; C Boyle
Journal:  Occup Environ Med       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 4.402

5.  The validation of work-related self-reported asthma exacerbation.

Authors:  Aimee R Bolen; Paul K Henneberger; Xiaoming Liang; Susan R Sama; Peggy A Preusse; Richard A Rosiello; Donald K Milton
Journal:  Occup Environ Med       Date:  2006-12-20       Impact factor: 4.402

6.  Systems Biology and Clinical Practice in Respiratory Medicine. The Twain Shall Meet.

Authors:  Cindy Thamrin; Urs Frey; David A Kaminsky; Helen K Reddel; Andrew J E Seely; Béla Suki; Peter J Sterk
Journal:  Am J Respir Crit Care Med       Date:  2016-11-01       Impact factor: 21.405

7.  Occupational asthma: an assessment of diagnostic agreement between physicians.

Authors:  David Fishwick; Lisa Bradshaw; Mandy Henson; Chris Stenton; David Hendrick; Sherwood Burge; Rob Niven; Chris Warburton; Trevor Rogers; Roger Rawbone; Paul Cullinan; Chris Barber; Tony Pickering; Nerys Williams; Jon Ayres; Andrew D Curran
Journal:  Occup Environ Med       Date:  2006-11-09       Impact factor: 4.402

8.  Assessment of work-related asthma prevalence, control and severity: protocol of a field study.

Authors:  Hermine Mével; Valérie Demange; Emmanuelle Penven; Christian Trontin; Pascal Wild; Christophe Paris
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2016-11-16       Impact factor: 3.295

9.  Pulmonary Function Testing in Work-Related Asthma: An Overview from Spirometry to Specific Inhalation Challenge.

Authors:  Mathias Poussel; Isabelle Thaon; Emmanuelle Penven; Angelica I Tiotiu
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2021-02-26       Impact factor: 3.390

10.  Diagnostic approach in cases with suspected work-related asthma.

Authors:  Tor B Aasen; P Sherwood Burge; Paul K Henneberger; Vivi Schlünssen; Xaver Baur
Journal:  J Occup Med Toxicol       Date:  2013-06-14       Impact factor: 2.646

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.