首页> 外文期刊>Respiratory medicine >Differences between absolute and predicted values of forced expiratory volumes to classify ventilatory impairment in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
【24h】

Differences between absolute and predicted values of forced expiratory volumes to classify ventilatory impairment in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

机译:强制呼气卷的绝对和预测值与慢性阻塞性肺病中通风障碍的绝对与预测值之间的差异

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

The Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) severity criterion for COPD is used widely in clinical and research settings; however, it requires the use of ethnic-or population-specific reference equations. We propose two alternative severity criteria based on absolute post-bronchodilator FEV1 values (FEV1 and FEV1/height(2)) that do not depend on reference equations. We compared the accuracy of these classification schemasto those based on % predicted values (GOLD criterion) and Z-scores of post-bronchodilator FEV1 to predict COPD-related functional outcomes or percent emphysema by computerized tomography of the lung. We tested the predictive accuracy of all severity criteria for the 6-minute walk distance (6MWD), St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), 36-item Short-Form Health Survey physical health component score (SF-36) and the MMRC Dyspnea Score. We used 10-fold cross-validation to estimate average prediction errors and Bonferroni-adjusted t-tests to compare average prediction errors across classification criteria. We analyzed data of 3772 participants with COPD (average age 63 years, 54% male). Severity criteria based on absolute post-bronchodilator FEV1 or FEV1/height(2) yielded similar prediction errors for 6MWD, SGRQ, SF-36 physical health component score, and the MMRC Dyspnea Score when compared to the GOLD criterion (all p > 0.34); and, had similar predictive accuracy when compared with the Z-scores criterion, with the exception for 6MWD where post-bronchodilator FEV1 appeared to perform slightly better than Z-scores (p = 0.01). Subgroup analyses did not identify differences across severity criteria by race, sex, or age between absolute values and the GOLD criterion or one based on Z-scores. Severity criteria for COPD based on absolute values of post-bronchodilator FEV1 performed equally as well as did criteria based on predicted values when benchmarked against COPD-related functional and structural outcomes, are simple to use, and may provide a more accessible and comparable approach to severity classification worldwide, especially in settings where prediction equations are not available. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
机译:COPD的慢性阻塞性肺病(金)严重程度标准的全球倡议在临床和研究环境中广泛使用;但是,它需要使用种族或人口特定的参考方程。我们提出了两个基于绝对的支气管扩张器FEV1值的替代严重性标准(FEV1和FEV1 /高度(2)),其不依赖于参考方程。我们比较了这些分类段基于%预测值(金标准)和Z-Schodors的Z-Schododator Fev1的精度,以通过肺的计算机断层扫描来预测与肺癌相关的功能结果或肺气肿百分比。我们测试了6分钟的步行距离(6MWD),圣乔治呼吸问卷(SGRQ),36项短型健康调查体系成分评分(SF-36)和MMRC呼吸困难的所有严重性标准的预测准确性分数。我们使用了10倍的交叉验证来估计平均预测错误和Bonferroni调整的T检验,以比较分类标准的平均预测错误。我们分析了3772名参与者的数据,COPD(平均年龄为63岁,男性54%)。基于绝对支气管扩张剂FEV1或FEV1 /高度(2)的严重性标准产生了6MWD,SGRQ,SF-36物理健康成分评分的类似预测误差,与金标准相比,MMRC呼吸困难评分(所有P> 0.34) ;并且,与Z分数标准相比具有类似的预测精度,但是6MWD的例外,其中支气管扩张剂FEV1似乎略高于Z分数(P = 0.01)。亚组分析没有识别通过基于Z分数的绝对值和金标准之间的种族,性别或年龄跨越严重程度标准的差异。基于支气管扩张剂FEV1的绝对值的COPD的严重性标准同样执行,以及基于对与COPD相关的功能和结构结果的基于预测值的基于预测值的标准,可以使用,并且可以提供更可靠和可比的方法全世界严重性分类,特别是在无法使用预测方程的设置中。 (c)2015 Elsevier Ltd.保留所有权利。

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