Pulmonary function electronic monitoring devices - A randomized agreement study
Pulmonary function electronic monitoring devices - A randomized agreement study
复制标题
DOI：
10.1378/chest.128.3.1258
复制
发表时间：
2005-09-01
期刊：
影响因子：
9.6
通讯作者：
Vaz, M
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Fonseca, JA;Costa-Pereira, A;Vaz, M
研究目的：在临床环境中比较两种肺功能电子监测设备的会话内重现性（PiKo-1; Ferraris Respiratory Europe;赫里福德，英国;和Spirotel; MIR;罗马，意大利），带有一个机械装置（Mini-Wright峰值流量计; Clement-Clarke International; Harlow，埃塞克斯，英国），并使用办公室呼吸速度描记器作为参考来评估这些设备的准确性。设计、设置和参与者：在详细的指导下，没有气道疾病的成年人和患有稳定哮喘的门诊患者进行了四组呼气动作，每种设备一组，严格随机顺序。每组包括三个演习2至3分钟的休息themes.Measurements：再现的FEV 1和呼气峰流速（PEF）进行了评估的变异系数（CV）和组内相关系数（ICC），准确性进行了评估ICC和限制agreement.Results：的38名参与者进行评估，71%是女性和61%有哮喘。年龄范围为18 - 58岁，FEV 1范围为1.2 - 4.8 L。在所有监测设备中，< 6% and ICC was >FEV和PEF测量的重现性CV均为0.94。PiKo-1设备的FEV（ICC = 0.98）准确性优于PEF（ICC = 0.90）。Spirotel装置的FEV和PEF结果相似（ICC = 0.95）。Mini-Wright设备的准确性最低（ICC = 0.87），特别是对于PEF值< 500 L/min。结论：这些低成本和易于使用的电子监测设备显示出非常好的再现性，并与呼吸速度描记器一致。因此，PiKo-I和Spirotel器械似乎足以进行筛查和监测。然而，仍然需要前瞻性研究来评估其长期可重复性和可用性，特别是对改善呼吸护理的影响。
Study objectives: To compare in a clinical setting the within-session reproducibility, of two pulmonary function electronic monitoring devices (PiKo-1; Ferraris Respiratory Europe; Hereford, UK; and Spirotel; MIR; Rome, Italy) with one mechanical device (Mini-Wright Peak-Flow Meter; Clement-Clarke International; Harlow, Essex, UK), and to evaluate the accuracy of these devices using as reference an office pneumotachograph.Design, setting, and participants: After detailed instructions, adults without airways diseases and patients with stable asthma attending an outpatient clinic performed four sets of expiratory maneuvers, one set for each device, in a strictly, random order. Each set comprised three maneuvers with 2 to 3 min of rest between them.Measurements: Reproducibility of FEV1 and peak expiratory, flow (PEF) was assessed by a coefficient of variation (CV) and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), and accuracy was assessed by ICC and limits of agreement.Results: Of the 38 participants evaluated, 71% were women and 61% had asthma. Ages ranged from 18 to 58 years, and FEV1 ranged from 1.2 to 4.8 L. In all monitoring devices, CV was < 6% and ICC was > 0.94 for the reproducibility of both FEV, and PEF measurements. The accuracy of the PiKo-1 device was better for FEV, (ICC = 0.98) than for PEF (ICC = 0.90). The Spirotel device had similar results for FEV, and PEF (ICC = 0.95). The Mini-Wright device had the lowest accuracy (ICC = 0.87), particularly for PEF values < 500 L/min.Conclusions: These low-cost and easy-to-use electronic monitoring devices showed a very good reproducibility and were in agreement with the pneumotachograph. Therefore, the PiKo-I and Spirotel devices seem adequate for both screening and monitoring. However, prospective studies are still needed to assess their long-term reproducibility and usability and, particularly, the effects on the improvement of respiratory, care.