Determining factors affecting the acceptability of spirometry: A survey study in a tertiary chest diseases center.

IF 0.7 Q4 RESPIRATORY SYSTEM
Mutlu Onur Güçsav, Gülru Polat, Damla Serçe Unat, Eda Bayramiç, Emine Sena Dikmentepe Yılmaz
{"title":"Determining factors affecting the acceptability of spirometry: A survey study in a tertiary chest diseases center.","authors":"Mutlu Onur Güçsav, Gülru Polat, Damla Serçe Unat, Eda Bayramiç, Emine Sena Dikmentepe Yılmaz","doi":"10.5578/tt.20239708","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Unlike other laboratory tests, spirometry requires the participant’s full compliance with the maneuvers in the test for an acceptable test result. In this study, we aimed to determine the suitability of spirometric tests regarding acceptability and the factors associated with acceptability.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Before the test, our 15-scale questionnaire, prepared by us in the respiratory function laboratory, was applied to the participants who requested spirometric examination in our hospital. Afterwards, patients were subjected to spirometric analysis. Spirogram results of the participants were evaluated by four clinicians who were experts in the field based on the acceptability criteria in the American Thoracic Society and European Respiratory Society Spirometry Standardization Guidelines. Participants were divided into two groups as those who met the acceptability criteria and those who did not. Both groups were compared regarding demographic data, comorbidities, education levels, and questions in the questionnaire.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The acceptability spirometry rate was 71.2%. The most common error among those who could not perform an acceptable test was the inability to complete the expiratory time to the time that would create a plateau, with 37.3%. Education level and acceptability of spirometry were not related (p= 0.228). Asthma was statistically significantly higher in the group that performed acceptable spirometry (p= 0.049). Acceptable spirometry rate was statistically significantly higher in the participants who had previously performed spirometric tests compared to the other group (p< 0.001). The test success of the participants who did not have success anxiety about the test was significantly higher than the other group (p= 0.033).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Reduction of participants’ anxiety and repetitive testing increases test acceptability. For this reason, in our clinical practice, we recommend that people who want a spirometry test relieve their anxiety about the test and repeat the test in unacceptable tests.</p>","PeriodicalId":45521,"journal":{"name":"Tuberkuloz ve Toraks-Tuberculosis and Thorax","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10795267/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Tuberkuloz ve Toraks-Tuberculosis and Thorax","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5578/tt.20239708","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Unlike other laboratory tests, spirometry requires the participant’s full compliance with the maneuvers in the test for an acceptable test result. In this study, we aimed to determine the suitability of spirometric tests regarding acceptability and the factors associated with acceptability.

Materials and methods: Before the test, our 15-scale questionnaire, prepared by us in the respiratory function laboratory, was applied to the participants who requested spirometric examination in our hospital. Afterwards, patients were subjected to spirometric analysis. Spirogram results of the participants were evaluated by four clinicians who were experts in the field based on the acceptability criteria in the American Thoracic Society and European Respiratory Society Spirometry Standardization Guidelines. Participants were divided into two groups as those who met the acceptability criteria and those who did not. Both groups were compared regarding demographic data, comorbidities, education levels, and questions in the questionnaire.

Results: The acceptability spirometry rate was 71.2%. The most common error among those who could not perform an acceptable test was the inability to complete the expiratory time to the time that would create a plateau, with 37.3%. Education level and acceptability of spirometry were not related (p= 0.228). Asthma was statistically significantly higher in the group that performed acceptable spirometry (p= 0.049). Acceptable spirometry rate was statistically significantly higher in the participants who had previously performed spirometric tests compared to the other group (p< 0.001). The test success of the participants who did not have success anxiety about the test was significantly higher than the other group (p= 0.033).

Conclusion: Reduction of participants’ anxiety and repetitive testing increases test acceptability. For this reason, in our clinical practice, we recommend that people who want a spirometry test relieve their anxiety about the test and repeat the test in unacceptable tests.

影响肺活量测定可接受性的决定因素:一项在三级胸部疾病中心进行的调查研究。
简介:与其他实验室测试不同,肺活量测定需要参与者完全遵守测试中的操作,才能获得可接受的测试结果。在这项研究中,我们旨在确定肺活量测试在可接受性方面的适用性以及与可接受性相关的因素。材料和方法:测试前,我们在呼吸功能实验室编制的15量表被应用于在我院要求进行肺活量检查的参与者。之后,对患者进行肺活量测定分析。根据美国胸科学会和欧洲呼吸学会肺活量测量标准化指南中的可接受性标准,由该领域的四名专家对参与者的肺活量图结果进行了评估。参与者被分为两组,一组符合可接受标准,另一组不符合。两组在人口统计学数据、合并症、教育水平和问卷中的问题方面进行了比较。结果:肺活量测定的可接受率为71.2%。在那些不能进行可接受测试的人中,最常见的错误是无法完成呼气时间到将产生平稳期的时间,37.3%。教育水平和肺活量测定的可接受性没有相关性(p=0.228)。在进行可接受肺活量测量的组中,哮喘在统计学上显著更高(p=0.049)。与其他组相比,先前进行肺活量测试的参与者的可接受肺量测量率在统计学上明显更高(p<0.001)对测试没有成功焦虑的参与者显著高于其他组(p=0.033)。结论:减少参与者的焦虑和重复测试可以提高测试的可接受性。因此,在我们的临床实践中,我们建议想要进行肺活量测试的人减轻对测试的焦虑,并在不可接受的测试中重复测试。
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
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
9.10%
发文量
43
×
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