Spirometry values in a Greek population: Is there an appropriate reference equation?
Department of Pulmonology, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, G. Papanikolaou Hospital, Thessaloniki, Greece. Respirology
(Impact Factor: 3.35).
05/2011; 16(6):947-52. DOI: 10.1111/j.1440-1843.2011.02002.x
Most published reference values for lung function test (LFT) parameters introduce systematic bias. The aim of this study was to compare measured values of FEV(1) and FVC with the corresponding normal predicted values in a Greek population, and to produce reference equations for LFT parameters in this population.
In a cross-sectional study conducted in Macedonia, Greece, 1080 adult healthy, non-smokers (432 men, 648 women, aged 18-80 years), underwent spirometry. Measured values of FVC and FEV(1) were compared with predicted values determined using three existing sets of reference equations: one recently derived from a European population and two others widely used in Europe (European Coal and Steel Community; ECSC) and the USA (National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey; NHANES III). Height and age were entered into the multivariate regression analysis to produce reference equations for LFT parameters.
All three published sets of equations underpredicted FEV(1) in men. FVC was accurately predicted by all equations except NHANES III. The discrepancy was even greater among women; the ECSC equation underpredicted both FEV(1) and FVC, the NHANES III equation overpredicted both FEV(1) and FVC, while the third set of equations accurately predicted FEV(1) but overpredicted FVC. The derived reference equation for FEV(1) in men was -0.28 × age + 0.057 × height - 4.91, and in women -0.021 × age + 0.039 × height - 2.58. The derived reference equation for FVC in men was -0.28 × age + 0.071 × height - 6.763, and in women -0.019 × age + 0.056 × height - 5.018.
Measured FEV(1) and FVC values in a Greek population differed significantly from those predicted using previously published reference equations. The new locally derived spirometry reference equations may be more suitable for evaluation of lung function in everyday practice.
Available from: Amanda J Piper
Respirology 01/2012; 17(3):554-62. DOI:10.1111/j.1440-1843.2012.02127.x · 3.35 Impact Factor
Available from: Maria Raquel Soares
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
To evaluate the spirometry values predicted by the 2012 Global Lung Function Initiative (GLI) equations, which are recommended for international use, in comparison with those obtained for a sample of White adults used for the establishment of reference equations for spirometry in Brazil.
The sample comprised 270 and 373 healthy males and females, respectively. The mean differences between the values found in this sample and the predicted values calculated from the GLI equations for FVC, FEV1, and VEF1/FVC, as well as their lower limits, were compared by paired t-test. The predicted values by each pair of equations were compared in various combinations of age and height.
For the males in our study sample, the values obtained for all of the variables studied were significantly higher than those predicted by the GLI equations (p < 0.01 for all). These differences become more evident in subjects who were shorter in stature and older. For the females in our study sample, only the lower limit of the FEV1/FVC ratio was significantly higher than that predicted by the GLI equation.
The predicted values suggested by the GLI equations for White adults were significantly lower than those used as reference values for males in Brazil. For both genders, the lower limit of the FEV1/FVC ratio is significantly lower than that predicted by the GLI equations.
Jornal brasileiro de pneumologia: publicacao oficial da Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisilogia 07/2014; 40(4):397-402. DOI:10.1590/S1806-37132014000400007 · 1.02 Impact Factor
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.