The present study don't recommend the use of the recent ERS/GLI reference equations to interpret spirometry in North African adult population.

The few studies carried out on the effects of Ramadan fasting (RF) on spirometric values present contradictory conclusions. This study aimed at assessing whether RF affects healthy adults’ spirometric values. Twenty-nine nonsmoking healthy males (M ± standard error of mean [SEM] of age: 27 ± 1 years) who fasted during Ramadan (June 29-July 28, 2014) volunteered to the study. Three periods (before-Ramadan [June 23-25], mid-Ramadan [July 14-16] and after-Ramadan [August 11-14]) were selected for spirometry measurements that were consistently performed 5.5 to 3.5 hours (between 15:00 and 17:00 hours) before fasting break. Assessment sessions comprised following: weight (kg), forced vital capacity (FVC), first second expiratory volume (FEV1), FEV1/FVC, peak expiratory flow (PEF), maximal mid expiratory flow (MMEF), and forced expiratory flow rate at the x% of FVC to be exhaled (FEFx%). Spirometric data were expressed in percentages of reference values. Results were analyzed by applying repeated measures analysis of variance. The M ± SEM of weight (before-R: 81.6 ± 2.8 kg, mid-R: 80.8 ± 2.9 kg, after-R: 81.2 ± 2.9 kg), FEV1 (before-R: 99 ± 2%, mid-R: 98 ± 2%, after-R: 98 ± 2%), FVC (before-R: 103 ± 2%, mid-R: 101 ± 2%, after-R: 101 ± 2%), PEF (before-R: 112 ± 3%, mid-R: 113 ± 2%, after-R: 114 ± 3%), MMEF (before-R: 83 ± 3%, mid-R: 83 ± 3%, after-R: 82 ± 3%), FEF25% (before-R: 90 ± 5%, mid-R: 89 ± 6%, after-R: 87 ± 6%), FEF50% (before-R: 94 ± 4%, mid-R: 91 ± 4%, after-R: 93 ± 3%), and FEF75% (before-R: 108 ± 3%, mid-R: 111 ± 2%, after-R:111 ± 3%) were not significantly influenced by RF. To conclude, RF did not bring about any significant changes in the spirometric values of nonsmoking healthy adult males.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Background Studies investigating the effects of announcing spirometric lung-age (SLA) on the smokers’ self-reported smoking status reported conflicting results. Main objective To evaluate the effects of a single session intervention including an education conference about smoking harms and announcement of SLA on the participants’ self-reported smoking status. Methodology An interventional study was conducted in a cable factory. The intervention included four steps: PowerPoint presentation about raising smoking hazards awareness; general questionnaire; measurement of the anthropometric and spirometric data, and announcement of SLA; and evaluation of the smokers’ self-reported smoking status 10 months later (quitted smoking, decreased consumption; stable consumption, increased consumption). Results Thirty-six smokers completed the four steps. Ten months after the intervention, 11.1% of smokers quitted smoking, 52.7% decreased their consumption by 7  ±  4 cigarettes/day, 30.5% kept a stable consumption, and 5.5% increased their consumption by 9  ±  6 cigarettes/day. Conclusion Providing an education conference combined with announcing SLA motivated 64% of smokers to quit smoking or to reduce their cigarette consumption.