Clinical validation of automated spirometry used in suiveys of large occupational groups: Comparison with conventional waier spirometry

Albert Miller, Ming T. Chuang, Raphael Warshaw, Harry Smith, Irving J. Seukoff

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

2 Scopus citations

Abstract

An accurate, rugged automated spirometer which provides immediate data is useful both clinically and for screening large groups with various environmental exposures. Because the need for such surveys has been increasing, we compared a computerized mass flow-meier with a conventional water spirometer. The same forced expiration was measured by both instruments in the laboratory and during an occupational survey. Mean values for forced vital capacity (I'Ve) were 96 cc greater by the automated technique i.n the laboratory (this equals 2.2% of the value by the conventional method, with a correlation, r, of 0.998) and 97 cc greater in the field (2.3% of the conventional method; r = 0.9(5). Differences between the two methods in the laboratory and field for forced expiratory voiume in one second (FEV 1.0) were +24 cc (0.68%; r = 0.996) and +47 cc (1.6%; r = 0.9(6) and for forced expiratory flow (FEF)25-75 -179cc/sec (4.18%; r = 0.(68) and -63 cc/sec (2.1%; r = 0.(9), respectively. For FVC and FEVl.o, the differences between paired values were < 10% of the value by water spirometry in all mstances and < 5% in 95.5% and 96% of comparisons, respectively. For FEF 2:5-75 the di.fferences between paired values were < 20% m 97.2% and < 10% in 84.7% of comparisons. These fmdings confirm the validity of the measurements provided by the automated spirometer.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)266-273
Number of pages8
JournalArchives of Environmental Health
Volume34
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 1979
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Clinical validation of automated spirometry used in suiveys of large occupational groups: Comparison with conventional waier spirometry'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this