Comparison of Forced and Slow Vital Capacity Maneuvers in Defining Airway Obstruction

Obstructive lung disease is diagnosed by a decreased ratio of FEV to the vital capacity (VC). Although the most commonly used VC is FVC, American Thoracic Society guidelines suggest alternative VCs, for example, slow VC (SVC), may offer a more-accurate evaluation of breathing capacity. There is rece...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Respiratory care 2019-07, Vol.64 (7), p.786-792
Hauptverfasser: Huprikar, Nikhil A, Skabelund, Andrew J, Bedsole, Valerie G, Sjulin, Tyson J, Karandikar, Asmita V, Aden, James K, Morris, Michael J
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 792
container_issue 7
container_start_page 786
container_title Respiratory care
container_volume 64
creator Huprikar, Nikhil A
Skabelund, Andrew J
Bedsole, Valerie G
Sjulin, Tyson J
Karandikar, Asmita V
Aden, James K
Morris, Michael J
description Obstructive lung disease is diagnosed by a decreased ratio of FEV to the vital capacity (VC). Although the most commonly used VC is FVC, American Thoracic Society guidelines suggest alternative VCs, for example, slow VC (SVC), may offer a more-accurate evaluation of breathing capacity. There is recent evidence that using only FEV /FVC underrecognizes obstruction in subjects at high risk and who are symptomatic. Previous studies have indicated that healthy individuals show a minimum difference between FVC and SVC; however, testing of individuals with asthma and who are symptomatic indicates that SVC can be markedly larger than FVC. To evaluate the differences among SVC, FVC, and SVC-based measurements in the diagnosis of symptomatic obstructive lung disease. A retrospective analysis was performed of spirometry and plethysmography measurements from studies conducted between 2011 to 2015. We established a pulmonary function database that incorporated predictive equations from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey III (NHANES III). The SVC to FVC difference was calculated. FEV /SVC was compared with FEV /FVC by using NHANES III lower limit of normal values. A total of 2,710 studies with 2,244 subjects were reviewed. Spirometric obstruction, as defined by NHANES III, was identified in 26.1% of the studies (707/2,710). The mean (± SD) difference between SVC and FVC was 375.0 ± 623.0 mL and 258.8 ± 532.5 mL in those with and those without obstruction, respectively. Subgroup and multivariate analysis demonstrated age, body mass index, and FEV associated contributions to the difference between SVC and FVC. By using FEV /SVC, the prevalence of obstruction increased from 26.1 to 45.0% (1,219/2,710) and identified 566 additional studies of subjects with obstruction. Fifty-four percent of the subjects with newly-identified obstructive lung disease (305/566) had smoking histories, and 67.4% (345/512) received medications for obstructive lung disease. The isolated use of FVC-based diagnostic algorithms did not recognize individuals with symptomatic obstructive lung disease. Recognizing the difference between SVC and FVC measurements in subjects will improve testing and diagnosis of obstructive lung disease.
doi_str_mv 10.4187/respcare.06419
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>gale_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2194586404</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A594833012</galeid><sourcerecordid>A594833012</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c433t-4403c0ceeb9c1f4d1bcff06be35f73c4e6e37d3e771e49b15f8bc36b9af2977a3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNptkU1rHDEMhk1oabZprz0WQ6H0Mlt75Pnwcdk0bSElhyS9Go9HThxm7Ik9k7D_vt7mgxaCDkLieYWkl5APnK0Fb5uvEdNkdMQ1qwWXB2TFpYAC6kq8IivGSlZwKMUheZvSTS5rUck35BBYK1kNbEUut2GcdHQpeBosPQnRYE-17-n5EO7pbzfrgW71pI2bd_SX9rjcYUzUeXqM1nnnr-jGxXu9o2ddmuNiZhf8O_La6iHh-8d8RC5Pvl1sfxSnZ99_bjenhREAcyEEA8MMYicNt6LnnbGW1R1CZRswAmuEpgdsGo5CdryybWeg7qS2pWwaDUfky8PcKYbbBdOsRpcMDkPeMyxJlfkbVVsLJjL66QG90gMq522YozZ7XG0qKVoAxstMrV-gcvQ4OhN8Pjn3_xN8_kdwjXqYr1MYlv0X0ouTTQwpRbRqim7Ucac4U3sr1ZOV6q-VWfDx8balG7F_xp-8gz8qm5oR</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2194586404</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison of Forced and Slow Vital Capacity Maneuvers in Defining Airway Obstruction</title><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Huprikar, Nikhil A ; Skabelund, Andrew J ; Bedsole, Valerie G ; Sjulin, Tyson J ; Karandikar, Asmita V ; Aden, James K ; Morris, Michael J</creator><creatorcontrib>Huprikar, Nikhil A ; Skabelund, Andrew J ; Bedsole, Valerie G ; Sjulin, Tyson J ; Karandikar, Asmita V ; Aden, James K ; Morris, Michael J</creatorcontrib><description>Obstructive lung disease is diagnosed by a decreased ratio of FEV to the vital capacity (VC). Although the most commonly used VC is FVC, American Thoracic Society guidelines suggest alternative VCs, for example, slow VC (SVC), may offer a more-accurate evaluation of breathing capacity. There is recent evidence that using only FEV /FVC underrecognizes obstruction in subjects at high risk and who are symptomatic. Previous studies have indicated that healthy individuals show a minimum difference between FVC and SVC; however, testing of individuals with asthma and who are symptomatic indicates that SVC can be markedly larger than FVC. To evaluate the differences among SVC, FVC, and SVC-based measurements in the diagnosis of symptomatic obstructive lung disease. A retrospective analysis was performed of spirometry and plethysmography measurements from studies conducted between 2011 to 2015. We established a pulmonary function database that incorporated predictive equations from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey III (NHANES III). The SVC to FVC difference was calculated. FEV /SVC was compared with FEV /FVC by using NHANES III lower limit of normal values. A total of 2,710 studies with 2,244 subjects were reviewed. Spirometric obstruction, as defined by NHANES III, was identified in 26.1% of the studies (707/2,710). The mean (± SD) difference between SVC and FVC was 375.0 ± 623.0 mL and 258.8 ± 532.5 mL in those with and those without obstruction, respectively. Subgroup and multivariate analysis demonstrated age, body mass index, and FEV associated contributions to the difference between SVC and FVC. By using FEV /SVC, the prevalence of obstruction increased from 26.1 to 45.0% (1,219/2,710) and identified 566 additional studies of subjects with obstruction. Fifty-four percent of the subjects with newly-identified obstructive lung disease (305/566) had smoking histories, and 67.4% (345/512) received medications for obstructive lung disease. The isolated use of FVC-based diagnostic algorithms did not recognize individuals with symptomatic obstructive lung disease. Recognizing the difference between SVC and FVC measurements in subjects will improve testing and diagnosis of obstructive lung disease.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0020-1324</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1943-3654</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.4187/respcare.06419</identifier><identifier>PMID: 30890630</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Daedalus Enterprises, Inc</publisher><subject>Airway obstruction ; Algorithms ; Analysis ; Asthma ; Chronic obstructive lung disease ; Health surveys ; Lung diseases ; Lung volume measurement ; Nutrition ; Respiratory tract diseases ; Spirometry ; Venture capital ; Venture capital companies</subject><ispartof>Respiratory care, 2019-07, Vol.64 (7), p.786-792</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2019 by Daedalus Enterprises.</rights><rights>COPYRIGHT 2019 Daedalus Enterprises, Inc.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c433t-4403c0ceeb9c1f4d1bcff06be35f73c4e6e37d3e771e49b15f8bc36b9af2977a3</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27903,27904</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30890630$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Huprikar, Nikhil A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Skabelund, Andrew J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bedsole, Valerie G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sjulin, Tyson J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Karandikar, Asmita V</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Aden, James K</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Morris, Michael J</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison of Forced and Slow Vital Capacity Maneuvers in Defining Airway Obstruction</title><title>Respiratory care</title><addtitle>Respir Care</addtitle><description>Obstructive lung disease is diagnosed by a decreased ratio of FEV to the vital capacity (VC). Although the most commonly used VC is FVC, American Thoracic Society guidelines suggest alternative VCs, for example, slow VC (SVC), may offer a more-accurate evaluation of breathing capacity. There is recent evidence that using only FEV /FVC underrecognizes obstruction in subjects at high risk and who are symptomatic. Previous studies have indicated that healthy individuals show a minimum difference between FVC and SVC; however, testing of individuals with asthma and who are symptomatic indicates that SVC can be markedly larger than FVC. To evaluate the differences among SVC, FVC, and SVC-based measurements in the diagnosis of symptomatic obstructive lung disease. A retrospective analysis was performed of spirometry and plethysmography measurements from studies conducted between 2011 to 2015. We established a pulmonary function database that incorporated predictive equations from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey III (NHANES III). The SVC to FVC difference was calculated. FEV /SVC was compared with FEV /FVC by using NHANES III lower limit of normal values. A total of 2,710 studies with 2,244 subjects were reviewed. Spirometric obstruction, as defined by NHANES III, was identified in 26.1% of the studies (707/2,710). The mean (± SD) difference between SVC and FVC was 375.0 ± 623.0 mL and 258.8 ± 532.5 mL in those with and those without obstruction, respectively. Subgroup and multivariate analysis demonstrated age, body mass index, and FEV associated contributions to the difference between SVC and FVC. By using FEV /SVC, the prevalence of obstruction increased from 26.1 to 45.0% (1,219/2,710) and identified 566 additional studies of subjects with obstruction. Fifty-four percent of the subjects with newly-identified obstructive lung disease (305/566) had smoking histories, and 67.4% (345/512) received medications for obstructive lung disease. The isolated use of FVC-based diagnostic algorithms did not recognize individuals with symptomatic obstructive lung disease. Recognizing the difference between SVC and FVC measurements in subjects will improve testing and diagnosis of obstructive lung disease.</description><subject>Airway obstruction</subject><subject>Algorithms</subject><subject>Analysis</subject><subject>Asthma</subject><subject>Chronic obstructive lung disease</subject><subject>Health surveys</subject><subject>Lung diseases</subject><subject>Lung volume measurement</subject><subject>Nutrition</subject><subject>Respiratory tract diseases</subject><subject>Spirometry</subject><subject>Venture capital</subject><subject>Venture capital companies</subject><issn>0020-1324</issn><issn>1943-3654</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNptkU1rHDEMhk1oabZprz0WQ6H0Mlt75Pnwcdk0bSElhyS9Go9HThxm7Ik9k7D_vt7mgxaCDkLieYWkl5APnK0Fb5uvEdNkdMQ1qwWXB2TFpYAC6kq8IivGSlZwKMUheZvSTS5rUck35BBYK1kNbEUut2GcdHQpeBosPQnRYE-17-n5EO7pbzfrgW71pI2bd_SX9rjcYUzUeXqM1nnnr-jGxXu9o2ddmuNiZhf8O_La6iHh-8d8RC5Pvl1sfxSnZ99_bjenhREAcyEEA8MMYicNt6LnnbGW1R1CZRswAmuEpgdsGo5CdryybWeg7qS2pWwaDUfky8PcKYbbBdOsRpcMDkPeMyxJlfkbVVsLJjL66QG90gMq522YozZ7XG0qKVoAxstMrV-gcvQ4OhN8Pjn3_xN8_kdwjXqYr1MYlv0X0ouTTQwpRbRqim7Ucac4U3sr1ZOV6q-VWfDx8balG7F_xp-8gz8qm5oR</recordid><startdate>201907</startdate><enddate>201907</enddate><creator>Huprikar, Nikhil A</creator><creator>Skabelund, Andrew J</creator><creator>Bedsole, Valerie G</creator><creator>Sjulin, Tyson J</creator><creator>Karandikar, Asmita V</creator><creator>Aden, James K</creator><creator>Morris, Michael J</creator><general>Daedalus Enterprises, Inc</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201907</creationdate><title>Comparison of Forced and Slow Vital Capacity Maneuvers in Defining Airway Obstruction</title><author>Huprikar, Nikhil A ; Skabelund, Andrew J ; Bedsole, Valerie G ; Sjulin, Tyson J ; Karandikar, Asmita V ; Aden, James K ; Morris, Michael J</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c433t-4403c0ceeb9c1f4d1bcff06be35f73c4e6e37d3e771e49b15f8bc36b9af2977a3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>Airway obstruction</topic><topic>Algorithms</topic><topic>Analysis</topic><topic>Asthma</topic><topic>Chronic obstructive lung disease</topic><topic>Health surveys</topic><topic>Lung diseases</topic><topic>Lung volume measurement</topic><topic>Nutrition</topic><topic>Respiratory tract diseases</topic><topic>Spirometry</topic><topic>Venture capital</topic><topic>Venture capital companies</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Huprikar, Nikhil A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Skabelund, Andrew J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bedsole, Valerie G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sjulin, Tyson J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Karandikar, Asmita V</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Aden, James K</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Morris, Michael J</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Respiratory care</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Huprikar, Nikhil A</au><au>Skabelund, Andrew J</au><au>Bedsole, Valerie G</au><au>Sjulin, Tyson J</au><au>Karandikar, Asmita V</au><au>Aden, James K</au><au>Morris, Michael J</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison of Forced and Slow Vital Capacity Maneuvers in Defining Airway Obstruction</atitle><jtitle>Respiratory care</jtitle><addtitle>Respir Care</addtitle><date>2019-07</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>64</volume><issue>7</issue><spage>786</spage><epage>792</epage><pages>786-792</pages><issn>0020-1324</issn><eissn>1943-3654</eissn><abstract>Obstructive lung disease is diagnosed by a decreased ratio of FEV to the vital capacity (VC). Although the most commonly used VC is FVC, American Thoracic Society guidelines suggest alternative VCs, for example, slow VC (SVC), may offer a more-accurate evaluation of breathing capacity. There is recent evidence that using only FEV /FVC underrecognizes obstruction in subjects at high risk and who are symptomatic. Previous studies have indicated that healthy individuals show a minimum difference between FVC and SVC; however, testing of individuals with asthma and who are symptomatic indicates that SVC can be markedly larger than FVC. To evaluate the differences among SVC, FVC, and SVC-based measurements in the diagnosis of symptomatic obstructive lung disease. A retrospective analysis was performed of spirometry and plethysmography measurements from studies conducted between 2011 to 2015. We established a pulmonary function database that incorporated predictive equations from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey III (NHANES III). The SVC to FVC difference was calculated. FEV /SVC was compared with FEV /FVC by using NHANES III lower limit of normal values. A total of 2,710 studies with 2,244 subjects were reviewed. Spirometric obstruction, as defined by NHANES III, was identified in 26.1% of the studies (707/2,710). The mean (± SD) difference between SVC and FVC was 375.0 ± 623.0 mL and 258.8 ± 532.5 mL in those with and those without obstruction, respectively. Subgroup and multivariate analysis demonstrated age, body mass index, and FEV associated contributions to the difference between SVC and FVC. By using FEV /SVC, the prevalence of obstruction increased from 26.1 to 45.0% (1,219/2,710) and identified 566 additional studies of subjects with obstruction. Fifty-four percent of the subjects with newly-identified obstructive lung disease (305/566) had smoking histories, and 67.4% (345/512) received medications for obstructive lung disease. The isolated use of FVC-based diagnostic algorithms did not recognize individuals with symptomatic obstructive lung disease. Recognizing the difference between SVC and FVC measurements in subjects will improve testing and diagnosis of obstructive lung disease.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Daedalus Enterprises, Inc</pub><pmid>30890630</pmid><doi>10.4187/respcare.06419</doi><tpages>7</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0020-1324
ispartof Respiratory care, 2019-07, Vol.64 (7), p.786-792
issn 0020-1324
1943-3654
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2194586404
source EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; PubMed Central
subjects Airway obstruction
Algorithms
Analysis
Asthma
Chronic obstructive lung disease
Health surveys
Lung diseases
Lung volume measurement
Nutrition
Respiratory tract diseases
Spirometry
Venture capital
Venture capital companies
title Comparison of Forced and Slow Vital Capacity Maneuvers in Defining Airway Obstruction
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-26T15%3A51%3A08IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison%20of%20Forced%20and%20Slow%20Vital%20Capacity%20Maneuvers%20in%20Defining%20Airway%20Obstruction&rft.jtitle=Respiratory%20care&rft.au=Huprikar,%20Nikhil%20A&rft.date=2019-07&rft.volume=64&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=786&rft.epage=792&rft.pages=786-792&rft.issn=0020-1324&rft.eissn=1943-3654&rft_id=info:doi/10.4187/respcare.06419&rft_dat=%3Cgale_proqu%3EA594833012%3C/gale_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2194586404&rft_id=info:pmid/30890630&rft_galeid=A594833012&rfr_iscdi=true