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

View/ Open
Author
Perez-Padilla, Rogelio
Wehrmeister, Fernando C.
Lopez-Varela, Maria Victorina
Montes de Oca, Maria
Muiño, Adriana
Talamo, Carlos
Jardim, Jose R.
Valdivia, Gonzalo
Lisboa, Carmen
Menezes, Ana Maria B.
Note: Order does not necessarily reflect citation order of authors.
Published Version
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0067960Metadata
Show full item recordCitation
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.Other Sources
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3731337/pdf/Terms of Use
This article is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material, as set forth at http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of-use#LAACitable link to this page
http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:11855928
Collections
- HMS Scholarly Articles [17875]
Contact administrator regarding this item (to report mistakes or request changes)