HEFT Repository

Serial lung function variability using four portable logging meters.

Moore, Vicky C and Parsons, Nick R and Jaakkola, Maritta S and Burge, Cedd B S G and Pantin, Charles F and Robertson, Alastair S and Burge, P Sherwood (2009) Serial lung function variability using four portable logging meters. The Journal of asthma : official journal of the Association for the Care of Asthma, 46 (9). pp. 961-6. ISSN 1532-4303. This article is accessible to all HEFT staff and students via NHS Evidence www.evidence.nhs.uk by using their HEFT Athens login IDs

Full text not available from this repository.
Official URL: http://informahealthcare.com/doi/abs/10.3109/02770...

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Portable lung function logging meters that allow measurement of peak expiratory flow (PEF) and forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV(1)) are useful for the diagnosis and exclusion of asthma. The aim of this study was to investigate the within and between-session variability of PEF and FEV(1) for four logging meters and to determine the sensitivity of meters to detect FEV(1) and PEF diurnal changes.

METHODS

Thirteen assessors (all hospital staff members) were asked to record 1 week of 2-hour PEF and FEV(1) measurements using four portable lung function meters. Within-session variability of PEF and FEV(1) were compared for each meter using a coefficient of variation (COV). Between-session variability was quantified using parameter estimates from a cosinor analysis which modeled diurnal change for both lung function measures and also allowed for variation between days for individual sessions.

RESULTS

The mean within-session COV for FEV(1) was consistently lower than that for PEF (p < 0.001). PEF showed a higher but not significantly different (p = 0.068) sensitivity for detecting diurnal variation than FEV(1). PEF was also slightly more variable between days, but not significantly different than FEV(1) (p = 0.409). PEF and FEV(1) diurnal variability did not differ between the 4 meters (p = 0.154 and 0.882 respectively), but within-session FEV(1) COV differed between meters (p = 0.009).

CONCLUSION

PEF was marginally more sensitive to within-day variability than FEV(1) but was less repeatable. Overall, differences between the 4 meters were small, suggesting that all meters are clinically useful.

Item Type: Article
Additional Information: This article is accessible to all HEFT staff and students via NHS Evidence www.evidence.nhs.uk by using their HEFT Athens login IDs
Subjects: WF Respiratory system. Respiratory medicine
Divisions: Planned IP Care > Respiratory Medicine
Related URLs:
Depositing User: Preeti Puligari
Date Deposited: 27 Aug 2014 15:20
Last Modified: 27 Aug 2014 15:20
URI: http://www.repository.heartofengland.nhs.uk/id/eprint/546

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item