The clinical respiratory journal · 2008
Predicting inadequate spirometry technique and the use of FEV1/FEV3 as an alternative to FEV1/FVC for patients with mild cognitive impairment.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Allen Stephen, Yeung Pan, Janczewski Marek, Siddique Nasir
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Some patients cannot perform forced vital capacity (FVC). We conducted a study to answer three questions: Can the ability to perform components of spirometry be predicted by the Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE)? What proportion of subjects can perform forced expiratory volume in 3 s (FEV3) but not FVC? Does the forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1)/FEV3 ratio concord with FEV1/FVC ratio in patients with airflow obstruction?
METHODS: We conducted a prospective observational study of 267 patients with a mean age of 79 years, including subjects with indicators of frailty. They performed spirometry and the MMSE. Spirometric recordings were compared to the American Thoracic Society 1994 criteria.
RESULTS: FVC was achieved by 51% of patients. Inability to perform FVC was predicted by an MMSE < 24 (specificity 94%, sensitivity of 51%). An FEV1/FEV3 ratio < 80% matched a FEV1/FVC ratio < 70% (sensitivity 96%, specificity 97%). Twenty-five percent of subjects were able to reach FEV3 but not FVC; 14% of that group had an MMSE < 24. Subjects with an MMSE < 20 were unable reliably to perform any spirometry.
CONCLUSION: Patients with an MMSE < 24 are usually unable to reach FVC reliably when tested on a single occasion, but some can reach FEV3. Patients with MMSE < 20 cannot do spirometry. An FEV1/FEV3 ratio < 80% can be used to help identify patients with airflow obstruction if they are unable to perform full spirometry to FVC.
METHODS: We conducted a prospective observational study of 267 patients with a mean age of 79 years, including subjects with indicators of frailty. They performed spirometry and the MMSE. Spirometric recordings were compared to the American Thoracic Society 1994 criteria.
RESULTS: FVC was achieved by 51% of patients. Inability to perform FVC was predicted by an MMSE < 24 (specificity 94%, sensitivity of 51%). An FEV1/FEV3 ratio < 80% matched a FEV1/FVC ratio < 70% (sensitivity 96%, specificity 97%). Twenty-five percent of subjects were able to reach FEV3 but not FVC; 14% of that group had an MMSE < 24. Subjects with an MMSE < 20 were unable reliably to perform any spirometry.
CONCLUSION: Patients with an MMSE < 24 are usually unable to reach FVC reliably when tested on a single occasion, but some can reach FEV3. Patients with MMSE < 20 cannot do spirometry. An FEV1/FEV3 ratio < 80% can be used to help identify patients with airflow obstruction if they are unable to perform full spirometry to FVC.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
AgedAged, 80 and overAirway ObstructionCognition DisordersFemaleForced Expiratory VolumeHumansMaleMiddle AgedPredictive Value of TestsProbabilityProspective StudiesPulmonary Disease, Chronic ObstructivePulmonary VentilationReference ValuesRespiratory MechanicsRisk AssessmentSensitivity and SpecificitySeverity of Illness IndexSpirometryVital Capacity