首页> 外文期刊>The journal of asthma >Two ATS recommended protocols for administration of methacholine are not equal.
【24h】

Two ATS recommended protocols for administration of methacholine are not equal.

机译:ATS推荐的两种乙酰甲胆碱管理方案并不相同。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

BACKGROUND: The 1999 American Thoracic Society methacholine challenge guidelines stated that the 5-breath dosimeter method of methacholine administration is similar to the 2-minute tidal breath method. Recent data has disputed this assertion. We examined the differences in the diagnosis of asthma using these two methods. METHODS: Data were abstracted from a prospectively generated pulmonary function database over 4 years. During the first 2 years the 5-breath dosimeter method was used, and the subsequent 2 years the 2-minute tidal breath method was used. The effect of the delivery technique was assessed by crude and adjusted odds ratios, controlling for known confounders and group differences. RESULTS: A total of 907 subjects underwent methacholine challenge testing during the 4-year study period: 19.3% of the subjects tested with the 5-breath dosimeter method and 31.2% of those tested with the 2-minute tidal breathing method had a PC20 16.0 mg/mL) was also altered by the differences between the testing techniques. Using the 5-breath dosimeter method, 72.4% of subjects were ruled out for airway hyper-responsiveness, whereas only 59.9% of subjects were ruled out with the 2-minute tidal breathing technique (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The two recommended protocols for the diagnosis of asthma are not equivalent and significantly alter the rate of diagnosis of asthma as well as the severity. The differences were seen across all PC20 levels, from those with strongly positive tests (PC20 16.0 mg/mL).
机译:背景:1999年美国胸科学会的乙酰甲胆碱挑战指南指出,乙酰甲胆碱的5呼吸剂量法与2分钟潮气呼吸法相似。最近的数据对此说法提出了质疑。我们使用这两种方法检查了哮喘诊断的差异。方法:从前瞻性生成的肺功能数据库中提取4年以上的数据。在最初的2年中,使用了5气量剂量计法,随后的2年中,使用了2分钟的潮气呼吸法。传递技术的效果通过粗略和调整后的优势比进行评估,以控制已知的混杂因素和群体差异。结果:在为期4年的研究期内,共907名受试者接受了甲胆碱激发试验:采用5气量剂量计法测试的受试者为19.3%,采用2分钟潮气呼吸法测试的受试者为31.2%,其PC20或= 8.0 mg / mL(或1.90,95%CI 1.4至2.58,p <0.001)。测试技术之间的差异也改变了可靠排除气道高反应性的能力(PC20> 16.0 mg / mL)。使用5呼吸剂量计方法,排除了72.4%的受试者气道高反应性,而使用2分钟的潮气呼吸技术仅排除了59.9%的受试者(p <0.001)。结论:推荐的两种哮喘诊断方案并不相同,它们会显着改变哮喘的诊断率和严重程度。在所有PC20水平上都发现了差异,从那些呈强阳性试验(PC20 <或= 1.0 mg / mL)以及那些呈阴性试验的气道高反应性(PC20> 16.0 mg / mL)开始。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号