| Literature DB >> 35869604 |
Jun Zhou1, Ping Wang1, Leixin Guo1, Jin Cao1, Min Zhou1, Ranran Dai1.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: A portable spirometer is a promising alternative to a traditional pulmonary function test (PFT) spirometer for respiratory function evaluation.Entities:
Keywords: automated interpretation; concordance; portable spirometer; pulmonary function test
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35869604 PMCID: PMC9376142 DOI: 10.1111/crj.13525
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Clin Respir J ISSN: 1752-6981 Impact factor: 1.761
Quality control criteria for the PFT measurement
| Grade | Requirement |
|---|---|
| A | Reliable results (acceptable results obtained three times, two repeatable exhalations, best FEV1 and FVC within 0.150 L) |
| B | Reliable results (acceptable results obtained three times, two repeatable exhalations, best FEV1 and FVC results within 0.200 L) |
| C | At least two acceptable results obtained, best FEV1 and FVC results within 0.250 L |
| D | Unreliable results (at least two acceptable but unrepeatable results, or only one acceptable result) |
| F | Unreliable and unacceptable results |
Abbreviations: FEV1, forced expiratory volume in the first second; FVC, forced vital capacity; PFT, pulmonary function test.
FIGURE 1Correlation analysis of spirometry outcomes from the traditional Jaeger spirometer and the portable Yue Cloud spirometer. FEV1, forced expiratory volume in the first second; FVC, forced vital capacity; MEF, maximal expiratory flow at 25%, 50%, and 75% of the forced vital capacity (MEF25, MEF50, and MEF75, respectively); MMEF, maximal mid‐expiratory flow; PEF, peak expiratory flow
FIGURE 2Bland–Altman plots with 95% limits of agreement summarizing the results of spirometry parameters measured by the traditional Jaeger spirometer and the portable Yue Cloud spirometer. The dotted lines represent the upper and lower LoAs. FEV1, forced expiratory volume in the first second; FVC, forced vital capacity; MEF, maximal expiratory flow at 25%, 50%, and 75% of the forced vital capacity (MEF25, MEF50, and MEF75, respectively); MMEF, maximal mid‐expiratory flow; PEF, peak expiratory flow
Classification of pulmonary dysfunction
| Yue Cloud | Total | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Normal | Obstruction | Restriction | Mixed | |||
| Jaeger | Normal | 61 (27.7) | 5 (2.3) | 1 (0.5) | 0 (0) | 67 (30.5) |
| Obstruction | 0 (0) | 52 (23.6) | 0 (0) | 1 (0.5) | 53 (24.1) | |
| Restriction | 5 (2.3) | 2 (0.9) | 42 (19.1) | 1 (0.5) | 50 (22.7) | |
| Mixed | 1 (0.5) | 1 (0.5) | 1 (0.5) | 47 (21.4) | 50 (22.7) | |
| Total | 67 (30.5) | 60 (27.3) | 44 (20.0) | 49 (22.3) | 220 (100.0) | |
Note: Data are expressed as a number (%).
Measurement of small airway dysfunction
| Yue Cloud | Total | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Without small airway dysfunction | Small airway dysfunction | |||
| Jaeger | Without small airway dysfunction | 101 (45.9) | 4 (1.8) | 105 (47.7) |
| Small airway dysfunction | 15 (6.8) | 100 (45.5) | 115 (52.3) | |
| Total | 116 (52.7) | 104 (47.3) | 220 (100.0) | |
Note: Data are expressed as a number (%).
Classification of severity
| Yue Cloud | Total | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mild | Moderate | Moderate to severe | Severe | Very severe | |||
| Jaeger | Mild | 66 (30.0) | 5 (2.3) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 71 (32.3) |
| Moderate | 1 (0.5) | 19 (8.6) | 1 (0.5) | 1 (0.5) | 1 (0.5) | 23 (10.5) | |
| Moderate to severe | 0 (0) | 2 (0.9) | 13 (5.9) | 2 (0.9) | 0 (0) | 17 (7.7) | |
| Severe | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 1 (4.5) | 26 (11.8) | 0 (0) | 27 (12.3) | |
| Very severe | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 10 (4.5) | 10 (4.5) | |
| Total | 67 (30.5) | 26 (11.8) | 15 (6.8) | 29 (13.2) | 11 (5.0) | 148 (67.3) | |
Note: Data are expressed as a number (%).