BACKGROUND: The presence of restrictive lung disease has classically required the measure of total lung capacity to document 'true' restriction, which has limited its detection in large population-based studies. METHODS: We used spirometric data to classify people with restricted spirometry (forced expiratory volume in 1 second [FEV(1)]/forced vital capacity ≥ 0.70 and FEV(1) < 80% predicted) in the Burden of Lung Disease (BOLD) Study and determined the relation between this finding and demographic factors and the presence of chronic diseases, including diabetes mellitus, hypertension and cardiovascular disease. RESULTS: Overall, we found that 11.7% of men (546/4664) and 16.4% of women (836/5098) had restricted spirometry. Prevalence varied widely by site, from a low of 4.2% among males in Sydney, Australia, to a high of 48.7% among females in Manila, The Philippines. Compared to people with normal lung function, those with restricted spirometry had a higher prevalence of diabetes (12.2% vs. 4.6%), heart disease (15.0% vs. 7.7%) and hypertension (38.8% vs. 22.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Restricted spirometry is a common finding in population studies. Additional research is needed to better define and describe the mechanisms that lead to restricted spirometry and potential interventions.
BACKGROUND: The presence of restrictive lung disease has classically required the measure of total lung capacity to document 'true' restriction, which has limited its detection in large population-based studies. METHODS: We used spirometric data to classify people with restricted spirometry (forced expiratory volume in 1 second [FEV(1)]/forced vital capacity ≥ 0.70 and FEV(1) < 80% predicted) in the Burden of Lung Disease (BOLD) Study and determined the relation between this finding and demographic factors and the presence of chronic diseases, including diabetes mellitus, hypertension and cardiovascular disease. RESULTS: Overall, we found that 11.7% of men (546/4664) and 16.4% of women (836/5098) had restricted spirometry. Prevalence varied widely by site, from a low of 4.2% among males in Sydney, Australia, to a high of 48.7% among females in Manila, The Philippines. Compared to people with normal lung function, those with restricted spirometry had a higher prevalence of diabetes (12.2% vs. 4.6%), heart disease (15.0% vs. 7.7%) and hypertension (38.8% vs. 22.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Restricted spirometry is a common finding in population studies. Additional research is needed to better define and describe the mechanisms that lead to restricted spirometry and potential interventions.
Authors: William W Stringer; Janos Porszasz; Surya P Bhatt; Meredith C McCormack; Barry J Make; Richard Casaburi Journal: Chronic Obstr Pulm Dis Date: 2019-07-24
Authors: Nipasiri Voraphani; Debra A Stern; Jing Zhai; Anne L Wright; Marilyn Halonen; Duane L Sherrill; Jenny Hallberg; Inger Kull; Anna Bergström; Clare S Murray; Lesley Lowe; Adnan Custovic; Wayne J Morgan; Fernando D Martinez; Erik Melén; Angela Simpson; Stefano Guerra Journal: Lancet Respir Med Date: 2021-11-26 Impact factor: 30.700
Authors: Emily S Wan; John E Hokanson; Elizabeth A Regan; Kendra A Young; Barry J Make; Dawn L DeMeo; Stefanie E Mason; Raul San Jose Estepar; James D Crapo; Edwin K Silverman Journal: Chest Date: 2021-09-27 Impact factor: 9.410
Authors: Rafael E de la Hoz; Moshe Shapiro; Anna Nolan; Juan C Celedón; Jaime Szeinuk; Roberto G Lucchini Journal: Respir Med Date: 2020-06-07 Impact factor: 3.415
Authors: Jonathan Weber; Anthony P Reeves; John T Doucette; Yunho Jeon; Akshay Sood; Raúl San José Estépar; Juan C Celedón; Rafael E de la Hoz Journal: Lung Date: 2020-04-01 Impact factor: 2.584
Authors: Michael J Cuttica; Laura A Colangelo; Sanjiv J Shah; Joao Lima; Satoru Kishi; Alexander Arynchyn; David R Jacobs; Bharat Thyagarajan; Kiang Liu; Donald Lloyd-Jones; Ravi Kalhan Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2015-07-01 Impact factor: 30.528