Comparison of three carbon monoxide monitors for determination of smoking status in smokers and nonsmokers with and without COPD.

Lieke Christenhusz, Frans de Jongh, Paul van der Valk, Marcel Pieterse, Erwin Seydel, Job van der Palen
{"title":"Comparison of three carbon monoxide monitors for determination of smoking status in smokers and nonsmokers with and without COPD.","authors":"Lieke Christenhusz,&nbsp;Frans de Jongh,&nbsp;Paul van der Valk,&nbsp;Marcel Pieterse,&nbsp;Erwin Seydel,&nbsp;Job van der Palen","doi":"10.1089/jam.2007.0606","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In this (CAMOXI) study, three carbon monoxide (CO) monitors and salivary cotinine are assessed regarding their ability to distinguish smokers from nonsmokers, both in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and healthy people. Twenty-six healthy smokers, 25 healthy nonsmokers, 25 smoking, and 25 former smoking stable COPD patients (age 40-72 years) were included based on self-report (N = 101). All volunteers were measured following a 12-h abstinence period. Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values of a positive and negative test result were assessed for a range of cutoff points for both CO and salivary cotinine. The prescribed 9-ppm cutoff point of the Breath CO generates a sensitivity of 68% and 42% for COPD patients and healthy people, respectively. Using the prescribed cutoff point (10 ppm) the Smokelyzer produces 56% sensitivity for COPD patients and 23% for healthy people. Both monitors generate 100% specificity in both groups. The cutoff point for the Micro CO meter (5 ppm) generates 88% sensitivity and 92% specificity for COPD patients, and for healthy people 92% and 88%, respectively. The optimal cutoff points depend upon the goal of the test. Salivary cotinine has a 100% sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value over the range of 15 ng/mL through 40 ng/mL for healthy participants and at 10 ng/mL for COPD patients. The prescribed cutoff points for all three CO monitors generate misleading results concerning the determination of the smoking status in both populations. Salivary cotinine measurement outperforms CO measurements and a combination of the two tools is recommended.</p>","PeriodicalId":14878,"journal":{"name":"Journal of aerosol medicine : the official journal of the International Society for Aerosols in Medicine","volume":"20 4","pages":"475-83"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2007-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1089/jam.2007.0606","citationCount":"27","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of aerosol medicine : the official journal of the International Society for Aerosols in Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/jam.2007.0606","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 27

Abstract

In this (CAMOXI) study, three carbon monoxide (CO) monitors and salivary cotinine are assessed regarding their ability to distinguish smokers from nonsmokers, both in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and healthy people. Twenty-six healthy smokers, 25 healthy nonsmokers, 25 smoking, and 25 former smoking stable COPD patients (age 40-72 years) were included based on self-report (N = 101). All volunteers were measured following a 12-h abstinence period. Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values of a positive and negative test result were assessed for a range of cutoff points for both CO and salivary cotinine. The prescribed 9-ppm cutoff point of the Breath CO generates a sensitivity of 68% and 42% for COPD patients and healthy people, respectively. Using the prescribed cutoff point (10 ppm) the Smokelyzer produces 56% sensitivity for COPD patients and 23% for healthy people. Both monitors generate 100% specificity in both groups. The cutoff point for the Micro CO meter (5 ppm) generates 88% sensitivity and 92% specificity for COPD patients, and for healthy people 92% and 88%, respectively. The optimal cutoff points depend upon the goal of the test. Salivary cotinine has a 100% sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value over the range of 15 ng/mL through 40 ng/mL for healthy participants and at 10 ng/mL for COPD patients. The prescribed cutoff points for all three CO monitors generate misleading results concerning the determination of the smoking status in both populations. Salivary cotinine measurement outperforms CO measurements and a combination of the two tools is recommended.

三种一氧化碳监测仪测定吸烟者和非吸烟者(伴和不伴COPD)吸烟状况的比较。
在这项(CAMOXI)研究中,评估了三种一氧化碳(CO)监测仪和唾液可替宁区分慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)和健康人吸烟者和非吸烟者的能力。根据自述纳入26例健康吸烟者、25例健康非吸烟者、25例吸烟和25例曾经吸烟稳定的COPD患者(40-72岁)(N = 101)。所有志愿者在12小时的戒断期后都进行了测量。敏感性、特异性和阳性和阴性检测结果的预测值被评估为CO和唾液可替宁的截止点范围。对于COPD患者和健康人来说,规定的9 ppm的呼吸CO临界值分别产生68%和42%的敏感性。使用规定的截止点(10ppm), Smokelyzer对COPD患者的敏感性为56%,对健康人的敏感性为23%。两种监测仪在两组中均产生100%的特异性。Micro CO计(5 ppm)的截止点对COPD患者的灵敏度为88%,特异性为92%,对健康人的灵敏度为92%,特异性为88%。最佳的截止点取决于测试的目标。唾液可替宁在15 ng/mL至40 ng/mL范围内对健康参与者具有100%的敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值和阴性预测值,在10 ng/mL范围内对COPD患者具有阴性预测值。所有三种一氧化碳监测仪的规定截止点在确定两种人群的吸烟状况方面产生了误导性的结果。唾液可替宁测量优于一氧化碳测量,建议两种工具的组合。
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