Literature DB >> 29160421

Longitudinal study of lung function in pregnant women: Influence of parity and smoking.

Luciana Duzolina Manfré Pastro1, Miriam Lemos2, Frederico Leon Arrabal Fernandes3, Silvia Regina Dias Médici Saldiva4, Sandra Elisabete Vieira5, Beatriz Mangueira Saraiva Romanholo6,7, Paulo Hilário Nascimento Saldiva2, Rossana Pulcineli Vieira Francisco1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate pulmonary function in the first and third trimesters of pregnancy and analyze the influence of parity and smoking on spirometry parameters.
METHODS: This longitudinal prospective study included a cohort of 120 pregnant women. The inclusion criteria were as follows: singleton pregnancy, gestational age less than 13.86 weeks, and no preexisting maternal diseases. The exclusion criteria were as follows: change of address, abortion, and inadequate spirometry testing. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02807038.
RESULTS: A decrease in values of forced vital capacity and forced expiratory volume were noted in the first second from the first to third trimester. In the first and third trimesters, multiparous women demonstrated lower absolute forced vital capacity and forced expiratory volume values in the first second compared with nulliparous women (p<0.0001 and p=0.001, respectively). Multiparous women demonstrated reduced forced expiratory flow in 25% to 75% of the maneuver compared with nulliparous women in the first (p=0.005) and third (p=0.031) trimesters. The absolute values of forced expiratory flow in 25% to 75%, forced expiratory volume in the first second and predicted peak expiratory flow values in the third trimester were higher in smokers compared with nonsmokers (p=0.042, p=0.039, p=0.024, and p=0.021, respectively).
CONCLUSION: There was a significant reduction in forced vital capacity and forced expiratory volume values in the first second during pregnancy. Parity and smoking significantly influence spirometric variables.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29160421      PMCID: PMC5666444          DOI: 10.6061/clinics/2017(10)02

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clinics (Sao Paulo)        ISSN: 1807-5932            Impact factor:   2.365


INTRODUCTION

Pregnancy is a period during which the female body undergoes functional and anatomical alterations, including changes in lung function. These findings can be assessed by spirometry, a simple, inexpensive, and effective method 1,2. There is some controversy regarding the results of spirometry in pregnancy, particularly in terms of tobacco use and parity. Several studies measured lung function during pregnancy and after delivery. Mixed results have been reported for forced vital capacity (FVC), forced expiratory volume in the first second (FEV1), and the FEV1/FVC ratio with respect to whether they remain the same, increase, or decrease slightly 1,3,4. The predictors for decreasing lung function during pregnancy remain unknown. Multiparity and smoking status may be associated with decreased lung function.

Objectives

This study aimed to use spirometry to evaluate changes in pulmonary function in pregnant women between the first (T1) and third trimester (T3) of pregnancy and to evaluate the influence of smoking and parity during this period.

METHODS

This longitudinal prospective study was conducted from August 2011 to May 2013 at the University of São Paulo Medical School (FMUSP), Brazil. This study was approved by the Ethics Committee for Research Project Analysis at the Hospital of the Faculty of Medicine under number 193/11, and written informed consent was obtained from the subjects. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02807038.

Study population

We included 220 pregnant women who were consecutively recruited from the three primary care units located in the west of the city of São Paulo. The women were part of a larger cohort of 400 patients who were recruited to study the effects of environmental air pollution on pregnancy. The following inclusion criteria were applied: receipt of prior informed consent, singleton pregnancy, gestational age of less than 13.86 weeks at the first evaluation, and absence of preexisting maternal diseases. The exclusion criteria included withdrawal from the project, abortion, and inadequate spirometry testing performed at T1 and T3.

Study design

After the confirmation of pregnancy, community health workers made the first contact with the pregnant women. During this first meeting, the research project was explained to the pregnant women, who were invited to participate in the study and provide informed consent. If the women agreed to participate, they received a card with the first assessment date and information about spirometry. The measurement techniques and spirometry parameters were selected in accordance with the Guidelines for Pulmonary Function Test of the Brazilian Thoracic Association 5. All spirometric values were adjusted according to sex, age, height, and weight at the time of the exam to estimate the predicted values 6. At the first assessment, the patients were asked about previous pregnancies and tobacco use during pregnancy according to the questionnaire in the guideline cited above.

Statistical analysis

For the characterization and summary of the study variables, the mean and standard deviation and median, minimum and maximum values were used for quantitative variables, and absolute and relative frequency were used for qualitative variables. A paired t-test was used for comparison of spirometric variables in the first and third trimesters. The t-test was applied to compare the groups of nulliparous and multiparous women in relation to spirometric variables in each trimesters, and the Mann-Whitney-test was used for comparing smokers and nonsmokers.

RESULTS

The initial sample included 220 patients. In total, 11.4% of the patients were excluded due to abortion, 12.7% were excluded due to loss to follow-up, and 22% were excluded due to unsatisfactory spirometric test results. The final sample consisted of 120 pregnant women with 240 valid spirometric exams. The maternal characteristics are presented in Table 1. We analyzed the mean BMI in the first and third trimesters in the two groups, with no significant difference found (first trimester: nulliparous=25.65±5.02; multiparous=26.75±5.81 p=0.273); (third trimester: nulliparous=28.70±4.73, multiparous=29.55±5.84 p=0.390). There also was no significant difference in the percentage of obese patients in the two groups studied (nulliparous=11/54 (20.4%), multiparous=13/66 (19.7%) p=0.927). Table 2 presents the spirometric values obtained in T1 and T3. The absolute and relative values of FVC and absolute and % predicted values of FEV1 were significantly reduced in T3 compared with T1.
Table 1

Maternal characteristics.

Mean±SD
Age (years)26.39±6.54
Height (meters)1.60±0.06
Weight (kg)T1= 68.55±13.86
T3 = 75.97±12.86
Gestational age (weeks)T1 = 10.60±1.80
T3 = 31.70±0.80
EthnicityWhite38 (31.17%)
Brown66 (55.00%)
Black16 (13.33%)
Marital statusSingle39 (32.50%)
Married44 (36.67%)
Cohabitating35 (29.17%)
Separated2 (1.67%)
Education levelIncomplete primary education30 (25.00%)
Complete primary education9 (7.5%)
Incomplete secondary education21 (17.50%)
High school47 (39.17%)
Incomplete higher education4 (3.33%)
University graduates9 (7.50%)
OccupationHousewife35 (29.2%)
Housemaid9 (7.5%)
General Services Assistant7 (5.8%)
Hairdresser/Manicurist5 (4.2%)
Unemployed8 (6.7%)
Other56 (46.6%)
Monthly income (Minimum wage (MW): $ 34,700)Less than half MW1 (0.80%)
Half to equal to one MW13 (10.80%)
Between one and three times MW68 (56.70%)
Between three and five times MW15 (12.50%)
Could not inform6 (5.00%)
Would not inform17 (14.20%)
ExclusionsAbortion25 (11.14%)
Discontinued participation18 (8.20%)
Change of address10 (4.50%)
Inappropriate spirometry test48 (21.80%)
Table 2

Comparison of spirometric variables between the first and third trimesters of pregnancy.

VariableT1T3Sig (p)
Mean±SDMean±SD
Absolute valuesFVC3.670±0.4673.532±0.459<0.001
FEV13.070±0.3972.964±0.387<0.001
FEV1/FVC0.837±0.0590.840±0.0490.486
FEF25-75%3.409±0.8873.390±0.7730.667
PEF6.179±1.1136.042±0.9640.044
% predicted valuesFVC101.31±10.35297.20±10.694<0.001
FEV199.43±10.88095.90±11.040<0.001
FEV1/FVC97.02±6.56397.53±6.0750.212
FEF25-75%96.00±24.96195.80±23.6240.881
PEF80.63±14.91879.23±12.8000.142

paired t-test.

In terms of parity, as shown in Table 3, 54 patients (45%) were nulliparous, and the other 66 patients (55%) were multiparous. In T1, the multiparous women (0.816±0.059) had smaller FEV1/FVC ratios compared with the nulliparous women (0.863±0.049) (p<0.0001) and smaller forced expiratory flow in 25% to 75% (FEF25-75%), at p=0.005 (multiparous women (3.207±0.911) and nulliparous women (3.657±0.797)). In T3, the multiparous women exhibited reductions in the same parameters compared with the nulliparous women: FEV1/FVC (multiparous women (30.827±0.047) and nulliparous women (0.856±0.047)) and FEF25-75% (multiparous women (3.253±0.788) and nulliparous women (3.558±0.727)) (p=0.00.1 and p=0.031, respectively). Maternal age differed among nulliparous (23.00±5.57) and multiparous (29.17±5.96) women at p≤0.001. To eliminate the confounding effect of age on absolute spirometry results, patients were categorized according to age: less or equal to 25 and more than 25 years age (Table 4).
Table 3

Comparison of spirometric variables in the first and third trimesters between nulliparous and multiparous women.

VariableNulliparous (n=54)Multiparous (n=66)Sig (p)
TMean±SDMedian (Min - Max)Mean±SDMedian (Min - Max)
AbsoluteFVC13.645±0.5373.67 (2.65 - 4.89)3.688±0.4003.70 (2.89 - 4.70)0.646
33.531 ±0.5093.57 (2.67 - 5.00)3.533 ±0.4163.49 (2.72 - 4.89)0.979
FEV113.142±0.4193.18 (2.29 - 4.07)3.010±0.3172.97 (2.15 - 4.12)0.071
33.015 ±0.4073.01 (2.24 - 4.00)2.923 ±0.3672.91 (2.12 - 4.05)0.196
FEV1/FVC10.863±0.0490.87 (0.75 - 0.96)0.816±0.0590.82 (0.70 - 0.97)<0.0001
30.856 ±0.0470.85 (0.75 - 0.98)0.827 ±0.0470.84 (0.72 - 0.96)0.001
FEF25-75%13.657±0.7973.71 (2.10 - 5.29)3.207±0.9113.24 (1.63 - 5.79)0.005
33.558 ±0.7273.59 (1.96 - 5.33)3.253 ±0.7883.26 (1.54 - 4.84)0.031
PEF16.346±1.1766.17 (3.87 - 9.40)6.043±1.0496.07 (3.78 - 9.76)0.140
36.137 ±1.0326.30 (3.77 - 8.84)5.965 ±0.9056.12 (3.72 - 9.06)0.330
% predicted valuesFVC1101.48±11.881101.00 (79 - 126.00)101.17±9.002101.50 (83.00 - 123.00)0.873
398.00 ±12.34997 (74.00 - 128.00)96.55 ±9.16998.00 (75.00 - 121.00)0.474
FEV11101.57±11.661102.00 (80.00 - 130.00)97.68±9.94598.50 (78.00 - 121.00)0.051
397.43 ±11.72197.00 (75.00 - 125.00)94.65 ±10.37495.00 (73.00 - 122.00)0.172
FEV1/FVC198.22±5.78499.00 (84.00 - 108.00)96.03±7.02796.00 (83.00 - 116.00)0.069
397.52 ±6.43399.00 (83.00 - 107.00)97.55 ±5.81698.50 (85.00 - 114.00)0.981
FEF25-75%199.46±22.09498.00 (51.00 - 161.00)93.17±26.91890.00 (53.00 - 173.00)0.170
396.59 ±21.91398.50 (46.00 - 151.00)95.15 ±25.08594.00 (50.00 - 150.00)0.741
PEF183.22±14.39282.00 (50.00 - 114.00)78.90±15.01480.00 (49.00 - 127.00)0.152
380.61 ±11.79481.00 (51.00 - 108.00)78.21 ±13.26379.00 (48.00 - 117.00)0.352
Table 4

Comparison of spirometric variables in the first and third trimesters between nulliparous and multiparous women at ≤ 25 and > 25 years old.

VariableTWomen ≤25 yearssig (p)Women >25 yearssig (p)
Nulliparous (n=40)Multiparous (n=20)Nulliparous (n=14)Multiparous (n=46)
Mean±SDMean±SDMean±SDMean±SD
AbsoluteFVC13.626±0.5323.670±0.3150.6913.712±0.5693.696±0.4360.910
33.515±0.4933.516±0.3180.9933.579±0.5733.542±0.4560.801
FEV113.143±0.4193.038±0.2650.3103.141±0.4382.999±0.4120.269
33.016±0.4112.911±0.2690.3023.014±0.4122.928±0.4090.499
FEV1/FVC10.870±0.0530.829±0.0540.0070.847±0.0320.812±0.0620.043
30.860±0.0500.830±0.0450.0260.845±0.0360.826±0.0490.185
FEF25-75%13.721±0.8253.230±0.6730.0253.474±0.7073.197±1.0040.342
33.564±0.7553.220±0.6500.0883.542±0.6673.268±0.8490.273
PEF16.292±0.9876.169±1.1250.6666.502±1.6395.989±1.0230.284
36.121±1.0885.762±0.9110.2106.185±0.8926.052±0.8990.630
% predicted valuesFVC1101.250±10.97099.800±7.0310.538101.143±14.623101.761±9.7460.928
397.450±11.03194.450±7.5770.22399.571±15.90797.457±9.7150.644
FEV011101.050±10.65196.050±7.7150.065103.071±14.71598.391±10.7710.198
396.625±10.86091.300±7.3490.05399.571±14.09596.109±11.2020.325
FEV1/FVC197.375±6.27094.350±5.6130.074100.643±3.15396.761±7.4990.007
396.475±6.75295.300±5.5160.504100.500±11.20298.522±5.7260.239
FEF25-75%196.950±22.36883.150±18.0820.020106.643±20.35397.522±29.0610.279
392.450±20.55182.750±17.2350.075108.429±22.065100.543±26.1810.312
PEF181.929±11.85775.867±14.2020.14486.000±19.02279.911±15.2940.273
380.111±13.19571.063±11.7100.02981.571±8.84780.756±12.9580.827
Regarding smoking, as shown in Table 5, 17 of the 120 (14.17%) women smoked one to ten cigarettes a day throughout their pregnancies. Some parameters were significantly higher in nonsmokers compared with smokers.
Table 5

Comparison of spirometric variables in the first and third trimesters between pregnant smokers and nonsmokers.

VariableNonsmokers (n=103)Smokers (n=17)Sig (p)
TMean±SDMedian (Min - Max)Mean±SDMedian (Min - Max)
AbsoluteFVC13.70±0.473.71 (2.71 - 4.89)3.48±0.373.45 (2.65 - 4.39)0.042
33.56±0.473.53 (2.67 - 5.00)3.36±0.293.32 (2.92 - 3.94)0.074
FEV113.10±0.403.11 (2.15 - 4.12)2.91±0.322.96 (2.29 - 3.38)0.115
32.99±0.392.95 (2.12 - 4.05)2.78±0.292.84 (2.12 - 4.05)0.039
FEV1/FVC10.84±0.060.84 (0.70 - 0.97)0.84±0.050.84 (0.71 - 0.96)0.842
30.84±0.040.84 (0.73 - 0.98)0.83±0.050.83 (0.72 - 0.95)0.154
FEF25-75%13.44±0.903.43 (1.63 - 5.59)3.22±0.753.26 (1.63 - 4.21)0.447
33.46±0.763.42 (1.55 - 5.33)3.00±0.693.07 (1.54 - 4.09)0.024
PEF16.25±1.146.22 (3.78 - 9.76)5.73±0.815.92 (4.02 - 7.24)0.055
36.11±0.966.20 (3.72 - 9.06)5.65±0.855.58 (3.89 - 6.83)0.078
% predicted valuesFVC1101.95±10.67102 (79 - 126)97.41±7.1596 (87 - 110)0.064
397.78±11.0098 (78 - 128)93.71±7.9294 (78 - 111)0.131
FEV11100.07±11.11100 (78 - 130)95.59±7.6399 (80 - 108)0.144
396.70±11.1096 (73 - 125)91.06±9.5395 (75 - 106)0.081
FEV1/FVC197.02±6.6297 (83 - 116)97.00±6.3999 (85 - 105)0.734
397.79±6.0999 (83 - 114)96.00±5.8897 (85 - 103)0.252
FEF25-75%196.86±25.1594 (51 - 173)90.76±23.7993 (53 - 156)0.416
397.43±23.5498 (50 - 151)85.94±22.3093 (46 - 135)0.076
PEF181.63±15.0282 (49 - 127)84.57±12.4778 (50 - 97)0.092
380.36±12.5380 (48 - 117)71.71±11.3970 (51 - 88)0.021

Mann-Whitney U-test.

Smokers had lower absolute values of FVC in T1 (3.48±0.37) when compared to nonsmokers (3.70±0.47), p=0.042 lower absolute values of FEV1 in T3 (2.78±0.29) when compared to nonsmokers (2.99±0.39), p=0.039 lower absolute values of FEF25-75% in T3 (3.00±0.69) when compared to nonsmokers (3.46±0.76), p=0.024 and lower values of predicted peak expiratory flow (PEF) in T3 (smokers (71.71±11.39) and nonsmokers (80.36±12.53), p=0.021.

DISCUSSION

In this study, it was possible to evaluate the spirometry results of 120 pregnant women during the first and third trimesters of pregnancy. In addition, the results were compared according to parity and smoking. Spirometry is the most widely used pulmonary function test, although it is estimated that approximately 15% of spirometry tests are inadequate 7,8. Because we required two complete examinations (i.e., in T1 and T3), some patients were excluded (22%). However, in one study of the long-term effect of air pollution on respiratory health in adult Swiss woman 9, a 28% loss to follow-up (related to inadequate spirometry tests) was reported, which was greater than the loss during follow-up in the current study. All spirometric values in the pregnant subjects were within normal ranges. The FVC and FEV1 values decreased significantly in the third trimester. Redivo 10 described no changes in pulmonary function in pregnancy 10; however, Grindheim et al. 7 demonstrated differences, particularly in FVC and PEF 7. The results of recent studies agree with our findings 1,11. These reduced values may be due to decreased negative intrapleural pressure due to an upward tilt of the diaphragm caused by the enlarging uterus. Another explanation is the reduction in the alveolar partial pressure of carbon gas, which is caused by hyperventilation during pregnancy 12. Our results also revealed differences in the spirometric values between smokers and nonsmokers and nulliparous and multiparous women. Compared with the nulliparous women, the multiparous pregnant women had significantly reduced absolute values of FEV1/FVC and FEF25-75%. This reduction was maintained among the younger multiparous women (≤25 years age) when compared to the younger nulliparous women, suggesting that the decrease found is due to parity. In relation to multiparous women who are more than 25 years old, only the FEV1/FVC ratio in T1 maintained a significant effect. It is important to consider that for this analysis, there was a significant decrease in the number of patients in each group, which can directly influence the calculation of the p value. It can be observed that the average of these spirometric variables for different age groups remained similar to the general analysis. The % predicted value of FEV1/FVC and FEF25-75%., which took into account individual characteristics (sex, age, and body mass index), was not significantly different between the two groups. Grindheim et al. 7 found similar results in their study, which analyzed a cohort of 87 healthy pregnant women. The authors concluded that the predicted FVC values in multiparous pregnant women decreased by 4.4% compared with those in nulliparous women (p=0.039). No statistically significant differences were observed in the absolute and predicted PEF values. Although obesity was related to changes in spirometry and also to multiparity, there was no difference between the groups in relation to this maternal characteristic. The absolute values of FVC, FEF25-75%, and FEV1 were significantly decreased in smokers compared with nonsmokers. Vergara et al. 13 studied lung function in 136 girls (45.5%) in relation to smoking (active and passive smokers) and investigated repercussions on spirometric parameters. A significant association was found between smoking and spirometric parameters (ANOVA), which was lower in smokers: FVC (p=0.001), FEV1 (p=0.0001), FEV1/FVC (p=0.004), PEF (p=0.0001), and FEF25-75% (p=0.0001). Prasad et al. 14 reported a study involving over 100 female smokers and 100 female non-smokers in the age group of 30-40 years in which three lung function tests, FEVI, FVC and PEFR, were employed, and it was observed that all parameters of the three lung function tests were significantly reduced among the smokers compared to the non-smokers. One limitation is the fact that smoking research was performed only through a structured questionnaire with the possibility of one response (yes or no). Currently, the use of monoximetry is suggested to more accurately discriminate smokers who, for any reason, will declare themselves to be non-smokers. Nonetheless, we must point out that the great majority of studies in the literature that use spirometry for lung function evaluation do not advocate the performance of monoximetry to exclude smoking. In this study, we concluded that the absolute values of FVC, FEF25-75%, and FEV1 were significantly decreased in smokers compared with nonsmokers, with significant reductions in absolute and in % predicted FVC and FEV1 values during pregnancy (T1 to T3). Parity and smoking significantly influenced spirometric parameters, and these are important factors that must be considered when analyzing spirometry results during pregnancy. FVC and FEV1 values decreased significantly in the third trimester. The reductions in these parameters may be explained by the upward tilt of the diaphragm caused by the enlarging uterus, causing a decreased negative intrapleural pressure, and because of a reduction in the alveolar partial pressure of carbon gas, which is caused by hyperventilation during pregnancy. Decreased lung function at both the beginning and end of the gestational period is more evident in multiparous women and those who smoke.

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS

Pastro LD performed spirometry and data analyses and was responsible for the final preparation of the manuscript. Lemos M assisted in the design of the study and spirometry. Fernandes FL provided training regarding spirometry and analyzed spirometric tests. Saldiva SR assisted in the preparation of the project and the recruitment of pregnant women. Vieira SE assisted in the preparation of the project and the recruitment of pregnant women. Romanholo BM performed spirometry. Saldiva PH assisted in the preparation of the project and the final data analysis. Francisco RP assisted in the preparation of the project, manuscript writing and final data analysis.
  12 in total

1.  Changes in pulmonary function during pregnancy: a longitudinal cohort study.

Authors:  G Grindheim; K Toska; M-E Estensen; L A Rosseland
Journal:  BJOG       Date:  2011-10-18       Impact factor: 6.531

2.  Lung function and breathing regulation parameters during pregnancy.

Authors:  Emilia Kolarzyk; Wojciech M Szot; Justyna Lyszczarz
Journal:  Arch Gynecol Obstet       Date:  2004-12-23       Impact factor: 2.344

Review 3.  Respiratory physiology in pregnancy.

Authors:  Matthew J Hegewald; Robert O Crapo
Journal:  Clin Chest Med       Date:  2011-03       Impact factor: 2.878

Review 4.  Alterations in physiology and anatomy during pregnancy.

Authors:  Eng Kien Tan; Eng Loy Tan
Journal:  Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol       Date:  2013-09-04       Impact factor: 5.237

5.  Standardization of Spirometry, 1994 Update. American Thoracic Society.

Authors: 
Journal:  Am J Respir Crit Care Med       Date:  1995-09       Impact factor: 21.405

6.  Smoking women and their lung function tests.

Authors:  B K Prasad; A P Sahay; A K Singh
Journal:  Kathmandu Univ Med J (KUMJ)       Date:  2004 Apr-Jun

7.  A linear study of pulmonary function tests in normal pregnant and non-pregnant women.

Authors:  Lata Gupta; R Dixit
Journal:  J Indian Med Assoc       Date:  2013-10

8.  [Lung function and exposure to tobacco smoke among adolescents].

Authors:  R G Suárez López de Vergara; C Galván Fernández; C Oliva Hernández; E Doménech Martínez; J M Dorta Delgado; M Dorta Suárez
Journal:  An Pediatr (Barc)       Date:  2007-12       Impact factor: 1.500

9.  Improved air quality and attenuated lung function decline: modification by obesity in the SAPALDIA cohort.

Authors:  Tamara Schikowski; Emmanuel Schaffner; Flurina Meier; Harish C Phuleria; Andrea Vierkötter; Christian Schindler; Susi Kriemler; Elisabeth Zemp; Ursula Krämer; Pierre-Olivier Bridevaux; Thierry Rochat; Joel Schwartz; Nino Künzli; Nicole Probst-Hensch
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2013-07-02       Impact factor: 9.031

10.  Low levels of some nutritional parameters of pregnant women in a rural community of South East Nigeria: implications for the attainment of the millennium developmental goal.

Authors:  So Ogbodo; Ui Nwagha; Anc Okaka; Ac Okeke; Fe Chukwurah; Po Ezeonu
Journal:  Ann Med Health Sci Res       Date:  2012-01
View more
  3 in total

1.  Pregnancy preserves pulmonary function following influenza virus infection in C57BL/6 mice.

Authors:  Meghan S Vermillion; Andrew Nelson; Landon Vom Steeg; Jeffery Loube; Wayne Mitzner; Sabra L Klein
Journal:  Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol       Date:  2018-05-31       Impact factor: 5.464

2.  The Association of Multiparity with Lung Function and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease-Related Phenotypes.

Authors:  Matthew Moll; Elizabeth A Regan; John E Hokanson; Sharon M Lutz; Edwin K Silverman; James D Crapo; Barry J Make; Dawn L DeMeo
Journal:  Chronic Obstr Pulm Dis       Date:  2020-04

3.  The impacts of parity on lung function data (LFD) of healthy females aged 40 years and more issued from an upper middle income country (Algeria): A comparative study.

Authors:  Abdelbassat Ketfi; Leila Triki; Merzak Gharnaout; Helmi Ben Saad
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-11-08       Impact factor: 3.240

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.