Ji-Yong Jing1, Tian-Cha Huang2, Wei Cui2, Feng Xu1, Hua-Hao Shen3. 1. Respiratory Department, the Second Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang Province, People's Republic of China. 2. Intensive Care Unit, the Second Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang Province, People's Republic of China. 3. Respiratory Department, the Second Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang Province, People's Republic of China. Electronic address: hh_shen@yahoo.com.cn.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The conventional FEV(1)/FVC test is the "gold standard" to quantitate airway obstruction, but elderly subjects or patients with severe respiratory diseases quite frequently cannot make such an effort. Many studies have investigated the usefulness of FEV(1)/forced expired volume in 6 s (FEV(6)) measurements as an alternative for FEV(1)/FVC for diagnosis of airway obstruction. We conducted a meta-analysis to determine the FEV(1)/FEV(6) substitute for FEV(1)/FVC in the diagnosis of airway obstruction. METHODS: After a systematic review of all-language studies, sensitivity, specificity, and other measures of accuracy of FEV(1)/FEV(6) in the diagnosis of airway obstruction were pooled using random-effects models. Summary receiver operating characteristic curves were used to summarize overall test performance. RESULTS: Eleven studies met our inclusion criteria. The summary estimates for FEV(1)/FEV(6) in the diagnosis of airway obstruction in the studies included were as follows: sensitivity, 0.89 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.83 to 0.93); specificity, 0.98 (95% CI, 0.95 to 0.99); positive likelihood ratio, 45.46 (95% CI, 18.26 to 113.21); negative likelihood ratio, 0.11 (95% CI, 0.08 to 0.17); diagnostic odds ratio, 396.02 (95% CI, 167.32 to 937.31); and diagnostic score, 5.98 (95% CI, 5.12 to 6.84). CONCLUSIONS: FEV(1)/FEV(6) is a sensitive and specific test for the diagnosis of airway obstruction. FEV(1)/FEV(6) can be used as a valid alternative for FEV(1)/FVC in the diagnosis of airway obstruction.
BACKGROUND: The conventional FEV(1)/FVC test is the "gold standard" to quantitate airway obstruction, but elderly subjects or patients with severe respiratory diseases quite frequently cannot make such an effort. Many studies have investigated the usefulness of FEV(1)/forced expired volume in 6 s (FEV(6)) measurements as an alternative for FEV(1)/FVC for diagnosis of airway obstruction. We conducted a meta-analysis to determine the FEV(1)/FEV(6) substitute for FEV(1)/FVC in the diagnosis of airway obstruction. METHODS: After a systematic review of all-language studies, sensitivity, specificity, and other measures of accuracy of FEV(1)/FEV(6) in the diagnosis of airway obstruction were pooled using random-effects models. Summary receiver operating characteristic curves were used to summarize overall test performance. RESULTS: Eleven studies met our inclusion criteria. The summary estimates for FEV(1)/FEV(6) in the diagnosis of airway obstruction in the studies included were as follows: sensitivity, 0.89 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.83 to 0.93); specificity, 0.98 (95% CI, 0.95 to 0.99); positive likelihood ratio, 45.46 (95% CI, 18.26 to 113.21); negative likelihood ratio, 0.11 (95% CI, 0.08 to 0.17); diagnostic odds ratio, 396.02 (95% CI, 167.32 to 937.31); and diagnostic score, 5.98 (95% CI, 5.12 to 6.84). CONCLUSIONS: FEV(1)/FEV(6) is a sensitive and specific test for the diagnosis of airway obstruction. FEV(1)/FEV(6) can be used as a valid alternative for FEV(1)/FVC in the diagnosis of airway obstruction.
Authors: Surya P Bhatt; Young-Il Kim; James M Wells; William C Bailey; Joe W Ramsdell; Marilyn G Foreman; Robert L Jensen; Douglas S Stinson; Carla G Wilson; David A Lynch; Barry J Make; Mark T Dransfield Journal: Ann Am Thorac Soc Date: 2014-03
Authors: Daniel Hoesterey; Nilakash Das; Wim Janssens; Russell G Buhr; Fernando J Martinez; Christopher B Cooper; Donald P Tashkin; Igor Barjaktarevic Journal: Respir Med Date: 2019-08-09 Impact factor: 3.415
Authors: Asli Gorek Dilektasli; Janos Porszasz; Richard Casaburi; William W Stringer; Surya P Bhatt; Youngju Pak; Harry B Rossiter; George Washko; Peter J Castaldi; Raul San Jose Estepar; James E Hansen Journal: Chest Date: 2016-07-22 Impact factor: 9.410
Authors: Raphael E Arku; Michael Brauer; MyLinh Duong; Li Wei; Bo Hu; Lap Ah Tse; Prem K Mony; P V M Lakshmi; Rajamohanan K Pillai; Viswanathan Mohan; Karen Yeates; Lanthe Kruger; Sumathy Rangarajan; Teo Koon; Salim Yusuf; Perry Hystad Journal: Environ Res Date: 2020-06-27 Impact factor: 6.498
Authors: Angelina Lim; Kay Stewart; Michael J Abramson; Susan P Walker; Johnson George Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2012-12-19 Impact factor: 3.295