• Tuberculosis and Respiratory Diseases
• /
• v.44 no.2
• /
• pp.298-308
• /
• 1997

Background : Portable devices for measuring peak expiratory flow(PEF) are now of proved value in the diagnosis and management of asthma and many lightweight PEF meters have become available. However, it is necessary to determine whether peak expiratory flow rate(PEFR) measurements measured with peak flowmeters is accurate and reproducible for clinical application. The aim of the present study is to define accuracy, agreement, and precision of mini-Wright peak flow meter(MPFM) against standard pneumotachygraph. Methods : The lung function tests by standard pneumotachygraph and PEFR measurement by MPFM were performed in a random order for 2 hours in 22 normal and 17 asthmatic subjects and also were performed for 3 successive days in 22 normals. Results : The PEFR measured with MPFM was significantly related to the PEFR and $FEV_1$ measured with standard pneumotachygraph in normal and asthmatics(for PEFR, r = 0.92 ; p < 0.001 ; for $FEV_1$, r = 0.78 ; p < 0.001). The accuracy of MPFM was within 100(limits of accuracy recommeded by NAEP) in all the subjects or 22 normal, mean difference from standard pneumotachygraph being 16.5L/min(percentage of difference being 2.90%) or 10.6L/min(percentage of difference being 1.75%), respectively. According to the method proposed by Bland and Altman, the 95% limits of the distribution of differences between MPFM and standard pneumotachygraph after correction of PEFR using our regression equation were +38.2 and -71.5L/min in all the subjects or 20.49~+9.49L/min in 22 normal and was similar to the intraindividual agreements for 3 successive days in normal. There was no statistically significant difference of PEFR measured with MPFM and standard pneumotachygraph among three days(p > 0.05) and the coefficient of variation($2.4{\pm}1.2%$) of PEFR measured with MPFM was significantly lower than that($5.2{\pm}3.5%$) with standard pneumotachygraph in normal (p < 0.05). Conclusion : This results suggest that the MPFM was as accurate and reproducible as standard pneumotachygraph for monitoring of PEFR in the asthmatic subjects.

• Tuberculosis and Respiratory Diseases
• /
• v.49 no.5
• /
• pp.585-593
• /
• 2000

Background : International consensus guidelines have recently been developed to improve the assessment and management of asthma. One of the major recommendation of these guidelines is that asthma severity should be assessed through the recognition of key symptoms, such as nocturnal waking, medication requirements, and objective measurements of lung function. Differential classification of asthma severity would lead to major differences in both long term pharmacological management and the treatment of severe exacerbation. Methods : This study examined the relationship between the symptom score and measurements of $FEV_1$ and PEF when expressed as a percentage of predicted values in asthmatics (n=107). Results : The correlation of $FEV_1$ % with PEFR% was highly significant (r=0.83, p<0.01). However, there was agreement in terms of the classification of asthma severity in 76.6% of the paired measurements of $FEV_1$ % and PEFR%. Agreement in the classification of asthma severity was also found in 57.1% of the paired analysis of $FEV_1$ % and symptom score. 39% of the patients classified as having moderate asthma on the basis of $FEV_1$ % recording would be considered to have severe asthma if symptom score alone were used. Low baseline $FEV_1$ and high bronchial responsiveness were associated with a low degree of perception of airway obstruction. Conclusion : The relationships between the symptom score, PEFR and $FEV_1$ were generally poor. When assessing asthma severity, age, duration, $PC_{20}$, and baseline $FEV_1$ should be considered.