A comparison of respiratory oscillometry and spirometry in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: performance time, symptom burden and test-retest reliability

S. Patel, Karl P. Sylvester, Zhe Wu, Serena Rhamie, Peter Dickel, Toby M. Maher, P. Molyneaux, P. Calverley, W. Man
{"title":"A comparison of respiratory oscillometry and spirometry in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: performance time, symptom burden and test-retest reliability","authors":"S. Patel, Karl P. Sylvester, Zhe Wu, Serena Rhamie, Peter Dickel, Toby M. Maher, P. Molyneaux, P. Calverley, W. Man","doi":"10.1183/23120541.00227-2024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In large multinational patient surveys, spirometry (which requires repeated, reproducible maximal efforts) can be associated with cough, breathlessness and tiredness, particularly in those with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF). Oscillometry is an effort-independent test of airways resistance and reactance. We hypothesised that oscillometry would take less time to perform and would be associated with reduced symptom burden than spirometry.Spirometry and oscillometry were performed in sixty-six participants with IPF and repeated two weeks later. We compared time taken to perform tests, symptom burden and test-retest reliability with Bland-Altman plots and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs).Oscillometry took significantly less time to perform than spirometry (mean (99% CI) −4.5 (−6.0 to −3.0) minutes) and was associated with lower symptom burden scores for cough (−1.3 (−1.7 to −0.8)), breathlessness (−1.0 (−1.4 to −0.5)), and tiredness (−0.5 (−0.9 to −0.2)). On Bland-Altman analysis, all measures showed good agreement, with narrow limits of agreement and the mean bias lying close to 0 in all cases. The ICC for Forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) and Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) were 0.94 and 0.89, and ranged between 0.70 and 0.90 for oscillometry measures.Oscillometry is quicker to perform and provokes less symptoms than spirometry in patients with IPF.","PeriodicalId":504874,"journal":{"name":"ERJ Open Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ERJ Open Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1183/23120541.00227-2024","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

In large multinational patient surveys, spirometry (which requires repeated, reproducible maximal efforts) can be associated with cough, breathlessness and tiredness, particularly in those with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF). Oscillometry is an effort-independent test of airways resistance and reactance. We hypothesised that oscillometry would take less time to perform and would be associated with reduced symptom burden than spirometry.Spirometry and oscillometry were performed in sixty-six participants with IPF and repeated two weeks later. We compared time taken to perform tests, symptom burden and test-retest reliability with Bland-Altman plots and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs).Oscillometry took significantly less time to perform than spirometry (mean (99% CI) −4.5 (−6.0 to −3.0) minutes) and was associated with lower symptom burden scores for cough (−1.3 (−1.7 to −0.8)), breathlessness (−1.0 (−1.4 to −0.5)), and tiredness (−0.5 (−0.9 to −0.2)). On Bland-Altman analysis, all measures showed good agreement, with narrow limits of agreement and the mean bias lying close to 0 in all cases. The ICC for Forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) and Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) were 0.94 and 0.89, and ranged between 0.70 and 0.90 for oscillometry measures.Oscillometry is quicker to perform and provokes less symptoms than spirometry in patients with IPF.
特发性肺纤维化患者呼吸振荡测定法与肺活量测定法的比较:表现时间、症状负担和重复测试可靠性
在大型跨国患者调查中,肺活量测定(需要反复、可重复的最大努力)可能与咳嗽、呼吸困难和疲倦有关,特别是在特发性肺纤维化(IPF)患者中。振荡测定法是一种不依赖于努力的气道阻力和反应测试方法。我们假设,与肺活量测定法相比,振荡测定法所需的时间更短,而且能减轻症状负担。我们对 66 名特发性肺纤维化患者进行了肺活量测定法和振荡测定法测试,并在两周后重复测试。我们用Bland-Altman图和类内相关系数(ICC)比较了进行测试所需的时间、症状负担和重复测试的可靠性。振荡测量所需的时间明显少于肺活量测量(平均值(99% CI)为-4.5 (-6.0 to -3.0)分钟),而且咳嗽(-1.3 (-1.7 to -0.8))、呼吸困难(-1.0 (-1.4 to -0.5))和疲倦(-0.5 (-0.9 to -0.2))的症状负担评分也较低。在布兰-阿尔特曼分析中,所有测量指标均显示出良好的一致性,一致性范围较窄,平均偏差均接近于 0。一秒钟用力呼气容积(FEV1)和用力肺活量(FVC)的ICC分别为0.94和0.89,振荡测量法的ICC介于0.70和0.90之间。
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