Defining and Grading an Obstructive Ventilatory Impairment: American Thoracic Society/ European Respiratory Society Interpretive Strategies of 2005 Versus 2022

Balsam Barkous, K. Kchaou, Chaima Briki, Sirine Jamli, S. Jameleddine
{"title":"Defining and Grading an Obstructive Ventilatory Impairment: American Thoracic Society/ European Respiratory Society Interpretive Strategies of 2005 Versus 2022","authors":"Balsam Barkous, K. Kchaou, Chaima Briki, Sirine Jamli, S. Jameleddine","doi":"10.9734/ajmah/2024/v22i2984","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: The American Thoracic Society (ATS) and the European Respiratory Society (ERS) have issued several updates to their guidelines for lung function testing between 2005 and 2022. \nObjective: We aimed to compare ATS/ERS recommendations for 2005(R1) and 2022(R2) in defining Obstructive Ventilatory Impairment (OVI) and in classifying its severity. \nPatients and Methods: It was a retrospective comparative study including 1129 patients. All patients underwent spirometry with measurement of Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 second (FEV1) and Forced Vital Capacity (FVC). An OVI was considered according to R1 when FEV1/FVC ratio is under the Lower Limit of Normal (LLN) and when the z-score of FEV1/FVC ratio is under -1.645 according to R2. For the severity levels of airflow obstruction: ATS/ERS previously recommended the use of percent predicted FEV1 with 5 levels using cut values of 70%, 60%, 50% and 35%. Recently updated for z-scores with cut values of -2, -2.5 and -4. Mean age was 54.23±19.23 years. \nResults: For defining an OVI, both definitions were comparable (529 patients with OVI). For the severity classification, the following proportions were assessed: 151 mild, 86 moderate,84 moderately severe, 133 severe and 75 very severe vs 148 mild, 238 moderate, 76 severe and 67 cases having a normal FEV1 (z-score of FEV1 above -1.645), which were classified as mild according to R1. Mild OVI(R2) were distributed according to R1 into 74 mild, 51 moderate, 16 moderately severe and 7 severe. Moderate OVI (R2) were dispatched using R1 to 10 mild, 34 moderate, 66 moderately severe, 103 severe and 25 very severe. Severe OVI(R2) were classified as 1 moderate, 2 moderately severe, 23 severe and 50 very severe. \nConclusion: ATS/ERS new and previous recommendations seem to be comparable in defining OVI. However, discrepancies were assessed in classifying its severity.","PeriodicalId":505327,"journal":{"name":"Asian Journal of Medicine and Health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Journal of Medicine and Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.9734/ajmah/2024/v22i2984","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The American Thoracic Society (ATS) and the European Respiratory Society (ERS) have issued several updates to their guidelines for lung function testing between 2005 and 2022. Objective: We aimed to compare ATS/ERS recommendations for 2005(R1) and 2022(R2) in defining Obstructive Ventilatory Impairment (OVI) and in classifying its severity. Patients and Methods: It was a retrospective comparative study including 1129 patients. All patients underwent spirometry with measurement of Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 second (FEV1) and Forced Vital Capacity (FVC). An OVI was considered according to R1 when FEV1/FVC ratio is under the Lower Limit of Normal (LLN) and when the z-score of FEV1/FVC ratio is under -1.645 according to R2. For the severity levels of airflow obstruction: ATS/ERS previously recommended the use of percent predicted FEV1 with 5 levels using cut values of 70%, 60%, 50% and 35%. Recently updated for z-scores with cut values of -2, -2.5 and -4. Mean age was 54.23±19.23 years. Results: For defining an OVI, both definitions were comparable (529 patients with OVI). For the severity classification, the following proportions were assessed: 151 mild, 86 moderate,84 moderately severe, 133 severe and 75 very severe vs 148 mild, 238 moderate, 76 severe and 67 cases having a normal FEV1 (z-score of FEV1 above -1.645), which were classified as mild according to R1. Mild OVI(R2) were distributed according to R1 into 74 mild, 51 moderate, 16 moderately severe and 7 severe. Moderate OVI (R2) were dispatched using R1 to 10 mild, 34 moderate, 66 moderately severe, 103 severe and 25 very severe. Severe OVI(R2) were classified as 1 moderate, 2 moderately severe, 23 severe and 50 very severe. Conclusion: ATS/ERS new and previous recommendations seem to be comparable in defining OVI. However, discrepancies were assessed in classifying its severity.
阻塞性通气障碍的定义和分级:美国胸科学会/欧洲呼吸学会 2005 年与 2022 年的解释策略
背景:美国胸科学会(ATS)和欧洲呼吸学会(ERS)在 2005 年至 2022 年间对肺功能测试指南进行了多次更新。目的:我们旨在比较 ATS/ERS 的建议:我们旨在比较 ATS/ERS 2005 年(R1)和 2022 年(R2)关于阻塞性通气功能障碍(OVI)的定义及其严重程度分类的建议。患者和方法:这是一项回顾性比较研究,包括 1129 名患者。所有患者都进行了肺活量测定,测量了 1 秒用力呼气容积(FEV1)和用力肺活量(FVC)。根据 R1,当 FEV1/FVC 比值低于正常下限(LLN),根据 R2,当 FEV1/FVC 比值的 z 值低于-1.645,则认为患者存在气流阻塞。对于气流阻塞的严重程度:ATS/ERS 曾建议使用预测 FEV1 百分比,分为 5 个等级,切点值分别为 70%、60%、50% 和 35%。最近更新为 z-scores,切点值为-2、-2.5 和 -4。平均年龄为 54.23±19.23 岁。结果:在定义 OVI 时,两种定义具有可比性(529 名 OVI 患者)。在严重程度分类方面,评估的比例如下:151 例轻度、86 例中度、84 例中重度、133 例重度和 75 例极重度与 148 例轻度、238 例中度、76 例重度和 67 例 FEV1 正常(FEV1 z 评分高于-1.645)的病例相比,后者根据 R1 被归类为轻度。根据 R1,轻度 OVI(R2)分为 74 例轻度、51 例中度、16 例中重度和 7 例重度。中度 OVI(R2)根据 R1 划分为 10 个轻度、34 个中度、66 个中度严重、103 个严重和 25 个极严重。严重 OVI(R2)分为 1 个中度、2 个中度严重、23 个严重和 50 个非常严重。结论:ATS/ERS 的新建议和以前的建议在定义 OVI 方面似乎具有可比性。但是,在对其严重程度进行分类时,评估结果存在差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信