Publication:

Reliability of FEV1/FEV6 to Diagnose Airflow Obstruction Compared with FEV1/FVC: The PLATINO Longitudinal Study

Loading...
Thumbnail Image

Date

2013

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Publisher

Public Library of Science
The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you.

Research Projects

Organizational Units

Journal Issue

Citation

Perez-Padilla, R., F. C. Wehrmeister, B. R. Celli, M. V. Lopez-Varela, M. Montes de Oca, A. Muiño, C. Talamo, et al. 2013. “Reliability of FEV1/FEV6 to Diagnose Airflow Obstruction Compared with FEV1/FVC: The PLATINO Longitudinal Study.” PLoS ONE 8 (8): e67960. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0067960. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0067960.

Abstract

QUESTION A 6-second spirometry test is easier than full exhalations. We compared the reliability of the ratio of the Forced expiratory volume in 1 second/Forced expiratory volume in 6 seconds (FEV1/FEV6) to the ratio of the FEV1/Forced vital capacity (FEV1/FVC) for the detection of airway obstruction. METHODS The PLATINO population-based survey in individuals aged 40 years and over designed to estimate the prevalence of post-Bronchodilator airway obstruction repeated for the same study participants after 5–9 years in three Latin-American cities. RESULTS Using the FEV1/FVC<Lower limit of normal (LLN) index, COPD prevalence apparently changed from 9.8 to 13.2% in Montevideo, from 9.7 to 6.0% in São Paulo and from 8.5 to 6.6% in Santiago, despite only slight declines in smoking prevalence (from 30.8% to 24.3%). These changes were associated with differences in Forced expiratory time (FET) between the two surveys. In contrast, by using the FEV1/FEV6 to define airway obstruction, the changes in prevalence were smaller: 9.7 to 10.6% in Montevideo, 8.6 to 9.0% in São Paulo, and 7.5 to 7.9% in Santiago. Changes in the prevalence of COPD with criteria based on FEV1/FVC correlated strongly with changes in the FET of the tests (R2 0.92) unlike the prevalence based on a low FEV1/FEV6 (R2 = 0.40). CONCLUSION The FEV1/FEV6 is a more reliable index than FEV1/FVC because FVC varies with the duration of the forced exhalation. Reporting FET and FEV1/FEV6<LLN helps to understand differences in prevalence of COPD obtained from FEV1/FVC-derived indices.

Description

Research Data

Keywords

Biology, Anatomy and Physiology, Respiratory System, Respiratory Physiology, Population Biology, Epidemiology, Medicine, Clinical Research Design, Diagnostic Medicine, Test Evaluation, Epidemiological Methods, Pulmonology, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Diseases

Terms of Use

This article is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material (LAA), as set forth at Terms of Service

Endorsement

Review

Supplemented By

Related Stories