A comparison of peak cough flow and peak expiratory flow in children with neuromuscular disorders

IF 4.7 3区 医学 Q1 PEDIATRICS Paediatric Respiratory Reviews Pub Date : 2024-09-01 DOI:10.1016/j.prrv.2024.04.001
{"title":"A comparison of peak cough flow and peak expiratory flow in children with neuromuscular disorders","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.prrv.2024.04.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p><span><span>Spirometry and peak cough flow testing (PCF) are commonly used in the respiratory assessment of children with a </span>neuromuscular disorder (NMD). Testing uses two different machines, increases laboratory time, costs and resource utilisation. No studies have assessed the correlation between peak expiratory flow (PEF) obtained from spirometry and PCF in children with NMD using one device. An audit of children with a NMD managed at the Children’s Hospital at Westmead in 2022–2024 aged &lt; 20 years who performed spirometry and PCF testing on the same device (Vyaire Body Box</span><sup>TM</sup>, Ultrasonic flow meter-based, or Vyaire Pneumotachograph<sup>TM</sup>, Pneumotach flow meter-based; Germany) was conducted to assess the correlation between PCF and PEF. Fifty-one sets of testing were identified, and 40 subjects (9F) had reproducible testing and were included. Median (range) age was 14.95 (7.20–19.00) years. Median PEF (L/min) was 4.05 (1.22–10.26) and median PCF (L/min) was 4.29 (1.69–10.82). PEF and PCF had a strong Pearson’s correlation coefficient, (R = 0.97, p = 0.03). The coefficient of determination was 0.93. If laboratory resources permit, spirometry should be the test of choice for children with NMD. On average, spirometry required multiple practices to achieve reproducibility to meet ATS/ERS standards. PCF testing can be utilised for children where performing technically acceptable spirometry is not possible.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":19658,"journal":{"name":"Paediatric Respiratory Reviews","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Paediatric Respiratory Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1526054224000265","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PEDIATRICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Spirometry and peak cough flow testing (PCF) are commonly used in the respiratory assessment of children with a neuromuscular disorder (NMD). Testing uses two different machines, increases laboratory time, costs and resource utilisation. No studies have assessed the correlation between peak expiratory flow (PEF) obtained from spirometry and PCF in children with NMD using one device. An audit of children with a NMD managed at the Children’s Hospital at Westmead in 2022–2024 aged < 20 years who performed spirometry and PCF testing on the same device (Vyaire Body BoxTM, Ultrasonic flow meter-based, or Vyaire PneumotachographTM, Pneumotach flow meter-based; Germany) was conducted to assess the correlation between PCF and PEF. Fifty-one sets of testing were identified, and 40 subjects (9F) had reproducible testing and were included. Median (range) age was 14.95 (7.20–19.00) years. Median PEF (L/min) was 4.05 (1.22–10.26) and median PCF (L/min) was 4.29 (1.69–10.82). PEF and PCF had a strong Pearson’s correlation coefficient, (R = 0.97, p = 0.03). The coefficient of determination was 0.93. If laboratory resources permit, spirometry should be the test of choice for children with NMD. On average, spirometry required multiple practices to achieve reproducibility to meet ATS/ERS standards. PCF testing can be utilised for children where performing technically acceptable spirometry is not possible.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
神经肌肉障碍儿童咳嗽峰值流速与呼气峰值流速的比较
在对患有神经肌肉障碍(NMD)的儿童进行呼吸评估时,通常会使用肺活量和咳嗽峰流速测试(PCF)。测试使用两种不同的机器,增加了实验室时间、成本和资源利用率。目前还没有研究对使用一种设备对 NMD 儿童进行肺活量测定和 PCF 所获得的呼气峰值流速 (PEF) 之间的相关性进行评估。2022-2024 年,Westmead 儿童医院对年龄小于 20 岁、使用同一设备(德国 Vyaire Body Box,超声波流量计;或 Vyaire Pneumotachograph,气动流量计)进行肺活量和 PCF 测试的 NMD 患儿进行了审核,以评估 PCF 和 PEF 之间的相关性。共确定了 51 组测试,40 名受试者(9F)的测试结果具有可重复性,并被纳入其中。年龄中位数(范围)为 14.95(7.20-19.00)岁。中位 PEF(L/min)为 4.05(1.22-10.26),中位 PCF(L/min)为 4.29(1.69-10.82)。PEF 和 PCF 具有很强的皮尔逊相关系数(R = 0.97,P = 0.03)。判定系数为 0.93。如果实验室资源允许,应将肺活量测定作为 NMD 患儿的首选检测方法。平均而言,肺活量测定需要多次操作才能达到 ATS/ERS 标准的重现性要求。对于无法进行技术上可接受的肺活量测定的儿童,可使用 PCF 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 去求助
来源期刊
Paediatric Respiratory Reviews
Paediatric Respiratory Reviews 医学-呼吸系统
CiteScore
12.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
40
审稿时长
23 days
期刊介绍: Paediatric Respiratory Reviews offers authors the opportunity to submit their own editorials, educational reviews and short communications on topics relevant to paediatric respiratory medicine. These peer reviewed contributions will complement the commissioned reviews which will continue to form an integral part of the journal. Subjects covered include: • Epidemiology • Immunology and cell biology • Physiology • Occupational disorders • The role of allergens and pollutants A particular emphasis is given to the recommendation of "best practice" for primary care physicians and paediatricians. Paediatric Respiratory Reviews is aimed at general paediatricians but it should also be read by specialist paediatric physicians and nurses, respiratory physicians and general practitioners. It is a journal for those who are busy and do not have time to read systematically through literature, but who need to stay up to date in the field of paediatric respiratory and sleep medicine.
期刊最新文献
Impact of highly effective modulator therapy on gastrointestinal symptoms and features in people with cystic fibrosis. Face masks and protection against COVID-19 and other viral respiratory infections: Assessment of benefits and harms in children. Respiratory infections in low and middle-income countries. Editorial Board The wheezy infant: A viewpoint from low-middle income countries
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1