[Repeatability of spirometrys expiratory flows].

Luis Efrén Santos-Martínez, José Viennue Ávila-Gómez, Adriana Ordoñez-Reyna, Mónica Yuridia Diana Flores-Morales, Javier Quevedo-Paredes
{"title":"[Repeatability of spirometrys expiratory flows].","authors":"Luis Efrén Santos-Martínez, José Viennue Ávila-Gómez, Adriana Ordoñez-Reyna, Mónica Yuridia Diana Flores-Morales, Javier Quevedo-Paredes","doi":"10.5281/zenodo.10278119","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The quality of the spirometry is estimated with criteria of acceptability and repeatability. The repeatability criteria accepted by consensus is < 0.150 L.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To know the repeatability in quality A spirometry.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>Analytical cross-sectional design. The demographic variables and the 3 best spirometry curves with normal, suggestive of restriction and bronchial obstruction profiles were obtained from consecutive subjects of both genders from 18 to 80 years of age. The repeatability was analyzed with the mean difference (bias) and the intraclass correlation coefficient.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>630 curves from 210 subjects were accepted. Group age 60 ± 15 years. Female predominance 113 (53.8%), occupation: domestic services 61 (29%), and diagnosed with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: 70 (33.4%). The differences in the curves were < 0.150 L. The mean difference (bias) and the intraclass correlation coefficient (95% confidence interval, 95% CI) of the forced expiratory volume in the first second were 1 vs. 2 maneuver: -0.01 (0.13, -0.14), 0.997 (95% CI 0.996, 0.998); 2 vs. 3 maneuver: 0.00 (0.13, -0.13), 0.997 (95% CI 0.996, 0.998), and maneuver 1 vs. 3: -0.00 (0.16, -0.17), 0.995 (95% CI 0.994, 0.996). Forced vital capacity: 1 vs. 2 maneuver: -0.01 (0.17, -0.18), 0.996 (95% CI 0.995, 0.997); 2 vs. 3 maneuver: 0.01 (0.17, -0.16), 0.997 (95% CI 0.0.996, 0.998), and maneuver 1 vs. 3: -0.00 (0.18, -0.19), 0.996 (95% CI 0.995, 0.997).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The repeatability obtained in spirometry with quality A validates the use of the repeatability criterion of 0.150 L.</p>","PeriodicalId":94200,"journal":{"name":"Revista medica del Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista medica del Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10278119","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 quality of the spirometry is estimated with criteria of acceptability and repeatability. The repeatability criteria accepted by consensus is < 0.150 L.

Objective: To know the repeatability in quality A spirometry.

Material and methods: Analytical cross-sectional design. The demographic variables and the 3 best spirometry curves with normal, suggestive of restriction and bronchial obstruction profiles were obtained from consecutive subjects of both genders from 18 to 80 years of age. The repeatability was analyzed with the mean difference (bias) and the intraclass correlation coefficient.

Results: 630 curves from 210 subjects were accepted. Group age 60 ± 15 years. Female predominance 113 (53.8%), occupation: domestic services 61 (29%), and diagnosed with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: 70 (33.4%). The differences in the curves were < 0.150 L. The mean difference (bias) and the intraclass correlation coefficient (95% confidence interval, 95% CI) of the forced expiratory volume in the first second were 1 vs. 2 maneuver: -0.01 (0.13, -0.14), 0.997 (95% CI 0.996, 0.998); 2 vs. 3 maneuver: 0.00 (0.13, -0.13), 0.997 (95% CI 0.996, 0.998), and maneuver 1 vs. 3: -0.00 (0.16, -0.17), 0.995 (95% CI 0.994, 0.996). Forced vital capacity: 1 vs. 2 maneuver: -0.01 (0.17, -0.18), 0.996 (95% CI 0.995, 0.997); 2 vs. 3 maneuver: 0.01 (0.17, -0.16), 0.997 (95% CI 0.0.996, 0.998), and maneuver 1 vs. 3: -0.00 (0.18, -0.19), 0.996 (95% CI 0.995, 0.997).

Conclusion: The repeatability obtained in spirometry with quality A validates the use of the repeatability criterion of 0.150 L.

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
[肺活量测定的重复性s 呼气流量]。
背景:肺活量测定的质量以可接受性和重复性为标准。一致接受的重复性标准是 < 0.150 L:材料和方法:分析性横断面设计:分析性横断面设计。从 18 至 80 岁的连续男女受试者中获取人口统计学变量和 3 条最佳肺活量曲线,包括正常、提示限制和支气管阻塞曲线。用平均差(偏差)和类内相关系数分析了重复性:结果:210 名受试者的 630 条曲线被接受。组别年龄为 60 ± 15 岁。女性占 113 人(53.8%),职业:家政服务 61 人(29%),诊断为慢性阻塞性肺病 70 人(33.4%):70 (33.4%).第一秒用力呼气量的平均差(偏差)和类内相关系数(95% 置信区间,95% CI)分别为 1 次与 2 次人工呼吸:-0.01(0.13,-0.14),0.997(95% CI 0.996,0.998);2 对 3 操作:0.00(0.13,-0.14),0.997(95% CI 0.996,0.998):0.00(0.13,-0.13),0.997(95% CI 0.996,0.998);1 对 3:-0.00(0.16,-0.17),0.995(95% CI 0.994,0.996)。强制生命容量:1 对 2 操作:-0.01(0.17,-0.18),0.996(95% CI 0.995,0.997);2 次与 3 次:0.01(0.17,-0.18),0.996(95% CI 0.995,0.997):0.01(0.17,-0.16),0.997(95% CI 0.0.996,0.998);1 次与 3 次:-0.00(0.18,-0.19),0.996(95% CI 0.995,0.997):结论:肺活量测定中获得的 A 质量重复性验证了 0.150 升重复性标准的有效性。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
[Breast cancer: suspicious findings on mastography associated with the histopathological result]. [Changes in hypertensive control 2020-2021 in a family medicine unit]. [Coronary artery disease multivessel not amenable to revascularization: contemporary cohort]. [Detection of ionizing radiation in operating room and hospital areas]. [Diaphragmatic excursion time index as a predictor of extubation in intensive therapy].
×
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