单次呼吸计数技术评估肺功能:系统回顾和荟萃分析。

IF 3.7 4区 医学 Q1 BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS Journal of breath research Pub Date : 2023-11-03 DOI:10.1088/1752-7163/ad0647
Glívia Maria Barros Delmondes, Nathália Ferreira Santos Couto, Murilo Gominho Antunes Correia Junior, Amanda Bezerra da Silva Bonifácio, Ricardo de Freitas Dias, Jorge Bezerra, Marcos André de Moura Santos, Mauro Virgílio Gomes de Barros, Emília Chagas Costa, Marco Aurélio de Valois Correia Junior
{"title":"单次呼吸计数技术评估肺功能:系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Glívia Maria Barros Delmondes, Nathália Ferreira Santos Couto, Murilo Gominho Antunes Correia Junior, Amanda Bezerra da Silva Bonifácio, Ricardo de Freitas Dias, Jorge Bezerra, Marcos André de Moura Santos, Mauro Virgílio Gomes de Barros, Emília Chagas Costa, Marco Aurélio de Valois Correia Junior","doi":"10.1088/1752-7163/ad0647","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Pulmonary function is usually assessed by measuring Vital Capacity (VC) using equipment such as a spirometer or ventilometer, but these are not always available to the population, as they are relatively expensive tests, difficult to transport and require trained professionals. However, the single breath counting technique (SBCT) appears as a possible alternative to respiratory function tests, to help in the pathophysiological understanding of lung diseases. The objective is to verify the applicability of the SBCT as a parameter for evaluating VC. This is a systematic review registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42023383706) and used for PubMed<sup>®</sup>, Scientific Electronic Library Online, LILACS, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases of articles published until January 2023. Methodological quality regarding the risk of bias was assessed using Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 and National Institutes of Health tools. Eleven of a total of 574 studies were included, of these, nine showed a correlation between VC and SBCT (weak in healthy, moderate in neuromuscular and strong in hospitalized patients). One study of hospitalized patients accurately identified a count value of 21 for a VC of 20 ml kg<sup>-1</sup>(Sensitivity = 94% and Specificity = 77%), and another estimated a count lower than 41 for a VC below 80% of predicted in patients with neuromuscular dystrophy (Sensitivity = 89% and Specificity = 62%), and another showed good intra and inter-examiner reproducibility in young, adult, and elderly populations. A meta-analysis of three studies showed a moderate correlation in subjects with neuromuscular diseases (<i>r</i>= 0.62, 95% CI = 0.52-0.71,<i>p</i>< 0.01). A high risk of bias was identified regarding the justification of the sample size and blinding of the evaluators. SBCT has been presented as an alternative to assess VC in the absence of specific equipment. There is a clear relationship between SBCT and VC, especially in neuromuscular and hospitalized individuals. New validation studies conducted with greater control of potential bias risks are necessary.</p>","PeriodicalId":15306,"journal":{"name":"Journal of breath research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Single breath counting technique to assess pulmonary function: a systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Glívia Maria Barros Delmondes, Nathália Ferreira Santos Couto, Murilo Gominho Antunes Correia Junior, Amanda Bezerra da Silva Bonifácio, Ricardo de Freitas Dias, Jorge Bezerra, Marcos André de Moura Santos, Mauro Virgílio Gomes de Barros, Emília Chagas Costa, Marco Aurélio de Valois Correia Junior\",\"doi\":\"10.1088/1752-7163/ad0647\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Pulmonary function is usually assessed by measuring Vital Capacity (VC) using equipment such as a spirometer or ventilometer, but these are not always available to the population, as they are relatively expensive tests, difficult to transport and require trained professionals. However, the single breath counting technique (SBCT) appears as a possible alternative to respiratory function tests, to help in the pathophysiological understanding of lung diseases. The objective is to verify the applicability of the SBCT as a parameter for evaluating VC. This is a systematic review registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42023383706) and used for PubMed<sup>®</sup>, Scientific Electronic Library Online, LILACS, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases of articles published until January 2023. Methodological quality regarding the risk of bias was assessed using Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 and National Institutes of Health tools. Eleven of a total of 574 studies were included, of these, nine showed a correlation between VC and SBCT (weak in healthy, moderate in neuromuscular and strong in hospitalized patients). One study of hospitalized patients accurately identified a count value of 21 for a VC of 20 ml kg<sup>-1</sup>(Sensitivity = 94% and Specificity = 77%), and another estimated a count lower than 41 for a VC below 80% of predicted in patients with neuromuscular dystrophy (Sensitivity = 89% and Specificity = 62%), and another showed good intra and inter-examiner reproducibility in young, adult, and elderly populations. A meta-analysis of three studies showed a moderate correlation in subjects with neuromuscular diseases (<i>r</i>= 0.62, 95% CI = 0.52-0.71,<i>p</i>< 0.01). A high risk of bias was identified regarding the justification of the sample size and blinding of the evaluators. SBCT has been presented as an alternative to assess VC in the absence of specific equipment. There is a clear relationship between SBCT and VC, especially in neuromuscular and hospitalized individuals. New validation studies conducted with greater control of potential bias risks are necessary.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15306,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of breath research\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of breath research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1088/1752-7163/ad0647\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of breath research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1088/1752-7163/ad0647","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

肺功能通常通过使用肺活量计或肺活量表等设备测量肺活量(VC)来评估,但这些设备并不总是适用于人群,因为它们是相对昂贵的测试,难以运输,并且需要训练有素的专业人员。然而,单次呼吸计数技术(SBCT)似乎是呼吸功能测试的一种可能的替代方法,有助于对肺部疾病的病理生理学理解。目的是验证SBCT作为评估VC参数的适用性。这是一项在国际前瞻性系统评价登记册(CRD42023383706)中注册的系统评价,用于PubMed®、SciELO、LILACS、EMBASE和Web of Science数据库中截至2023年1月发表的文章。使用QUADAS-2和NIH工具评估关于偏倚风险的方法学质量。共纳入574项研究中的11项,其中9项显示VC和SBCT之间存在相关性(健康患者较弱,神经肌肉患者中等,住院患者较强)。一项针对住院患者的研究准确地确定了20ml/kg VC的计数值为21(敏感性=94%,特异性=77%),另一项估计神经肌肉营养不良患者中VC低于预测值80%的计数值低于41(敏感性=89%,特异性=62%),而另一项研究在年轻、成年和老年人群中显示出良好的检查者内和检查者间再现性。一项对三项研究的荟萃分析显示,患有神经肌肉疾病的受试者之间存在中度相关性(r=0.62,95%CI=0.52-0.71,p
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Single breath counting technique to assess pulmonary function: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Pulmonary function is usually assessed by measuring Vital Capacity (VC) using equipment such as a spirometer or ventilometer, but these are not always available to the population, as they are relatively expensive tests, difficult to transport and require trained professionals. However, the single breath counting technique (SBCT) appears as a possible alternative to respiratory function tests, to help in the pathophysiological understanding of lung diseases. The objective is to verify the applicability of the SBCT as a parameter for evaluating VC. This is a systematic review registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42023383706) and used for PubMed®, Scientific Electronic Library Online, LILACS, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases of articles published until January 2023. Methodological quality regarding the risk of bias was assessed using Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 and National Institutes of Health tools. Eleven of a total of 574 studies were included, of these, nine showed a correlation between VC and SBCT (weak in healthy, moderate in neuromuscular and strong in hospitalized patients). One study of hospitalized patients accurately identified a count value of 21 for a VC of 20 ml kg-1(Sensitivity = 94% and Specificity = 77%), and another estimated a count lower than 41 for a VC below 80% of predicted in patients with neuromuscular dystrophy (Sensitivity = 89% and Specificity = 62%), and another showed good intra and inter-examiner reproducibility in young, adult, and elderly populations. A meta-analysis of three studies showed a moderate correlation in subjects with neuromuscular diseases (r= 0.62, 95% CI = 0.52-0.71,p< 0.01). A high risk of bias was identified regarding the justification of the sample size and blinding of the evaluators. SBCT has been presented as an alternative to assess VC in the absence of specific equipment. There is a clear relationship between SBCT and VC, especially in neuromuscular and hospitalized individuals. New validation studies conducted with greater control of potential bias risks are necessary.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of breath research
Journal of breath research BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS-RESPIRATORY SYSTEM
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
21.10%
发文量
49
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Breath Research is dedicated to all aspects of scientific breath research. The traditional focus is on analysis of volatile compounds and aerosols in exhaled breath for the investigation of exogenous exposures, metabolism, toxicology, health status and the diagnosis of disease and breath odours. The journal also welcomes other breath-related topics. Typical areas of interest include: Big laboratory instrumentation: describing new state-of-the-art analytical instrumentation capable of performing high-resolution discovery and targeted breath research; exploiting complex technologies drawn from other areas of biochemistry and genetics for breath research. Engineering solutions: developing new breath sampling technologies for condensate and aerosols, for chemical and optical sensors, for extraction and sample preparation methods, for automation and standardization, and for multiplex analyses to preserve the breath matrix and facilitating analytical throughput. Measure exhaled constituents (e.g. CO2, acetone, isoprene) as markers of human presence or mitigate such contaminants in enclosed environments. Human and animal in vivo studies: decoding the ''breath exposome'', implementing exposure and intervention studies, performing cross-sectional and case-control research, assaying immune and inflammatory response, and testing mammalian host response to infections and exogenous exposures to develop information directly applicable to systems biology. Studying inhalation toxicology; inhaled breath as a source of internal dose; resultant blood, breath and urinary biomarkers linked to inhalation pathway. Cellular and molecular level in vitro studies. Clinical, pharmacological and forensic applications. Mathematical, statistical and graphical data interpretation.
期刊最新文献
Correlations between propofol concentration in exhaled breath and BIS in patients undergoing thyroid surgery. Volatile organic compounds in exhaled breath, blood, and urine detected in patients with thyroid carcinoma using gas chromatography-ion mobility spectrometry-a pilot study. Effectiveness of a combination of laccase and green coffee extract on oral malodor: a comparative, randomized, controlled, evaluator-blind, parallel-group trial. Halitosis in oral lichen planus patients. Validation of a sensor system for the measurement of breath ammonia using selected-ion flow-tube mass spectrometry.
×
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