The all‐age spirometry reference ranges reflect contemporary Australasian spirometry

Thompson, Bruce; Stanojevic, Sanja; Abramson, Michael J.; Beasley, Richard; Coates, Andrew; Dent, Annette; Eckert, Brenton; Filsell, Sue; Musk, Arthur W.; Nolan, Gary; Dixon, Barbara; O'Dea, Chris; Savage, Jenni; Stocks, Janet; Swanney, Maureen P.; Hall, Graham

doi:10.1111/j.1440-1843.2011.01970.x

Cited by 39 publications

(58 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The precision with which spirometry data are interpreted hinges on the suitability of the selected norms [4, 37] . Mistakes in interpretation, with respect both to overestimation and underestimation of lung function abnormalities, can arise if inappropriate norms are applied [4, 37] .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…If there was an offset between the GLI-2012 norms [10] and test population (measured spirometric data), the expected Z-scores of the test population would have a mean of “> zero” and a SD of “> one” and would therefore be considered as statistically significant [10] . As done in some studies [10, 15, 16, 37] and according to a consensus established by the GLI scientific advisory panel ( http : //www . lungfunction .…”

Section: Population and Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The multi‐ethnic global lung initiative 2012 (GLI-2012) norms reflect contemporary adult's Algerian spirometry

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe validation of the multi-ethnic GLI-2012 spirometric norms has been debated in several countries. However, its applicability in Algeria has not been verified.AimTo ascertain how well the GLI-2012 norms fit contemporary adult Algerian spirometric data.MethodsThis was a cross-sectional study of a convenience sample of 300 healthy non-smoker adults (50% men, age range: 18–85 years) recruited from the Algiers region general population. All participants underwent a clinical examination and a plethysmography measurement. Z-scores for some spirometric data [FEV1, FVC, FEV1/FVC and forced expiratory flow at 25–75% of FVC (FEF25-75%)] were calculated. If the average Z-score deviated by “< ± 0.5” from the overall mean, the GLI-2012 norms would be considered as reflective of contemporary Algerian spirometry.ResultsThe means±SDs of age, height, weight, FVC, FEV1, FEV1/FVC and FEF25-75% of the participants were, respectively, 48±17 years, 1.65±0.10 m, 73±14 kg, 4.04±1.04 L, 3.18±0.82 L, 0.79±0.05 and 4.09±1.09 L/s. Almost the quarter of participants were obese. The total sample means±SDs Z-scores were 0.22±0.87 for FVC, 0.04±0.88 for FEV1, -0.34±0.67 for FEV1/FVC and 0.93±0.79 for FEF25-75%. For men and women, only the means±SDs of the FEF25-75% Z-scores exceeded the threshold of “± 0.5”, respectively, 1.13±0.77 and 0.73±0.76.ConclusionResults of the present study, performed in an Algerian population of healthy non-smoking adults, supported the applicability of the GLI-2012 norms to interpret FEV1, FVC and FEV1/FVC but not the FEF25-75%.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Population and Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The multi‐ethnic global lung initiative 2012 (GLI-2012) norms reflect contemporary adult's Algerian spirometry

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To nullify the significant differences in reference ranges across many studies, it has been suggested that collating lung function data from a number of centers is a more robust approach to interpreting lung function results [21,22,23,24]. This approach has been applied to spirometry [12,24,25], interrupter resistance [26], and gas transfer [11], and the application of this approach to measurements of maximal respiratory pressures in children requires investigation. …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some lung function data (spirometry, lung volumes, and gas transfer) from these children have been reported previously [10,11,12]. Static lung volumes [total lung capacity (TLC), residual volume (RV), and functional residual capacity (FRC)] were obtained by body plethysmography according to international guidelines [13,14,15].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Characterization of Maximal Respiratory Pressures in Healthy Children

Cox¹,

Verheggen²,

Stick³

et al. 2012

Respiration

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Measurements of maximal voluntary inspiratory (Pi_max) and expiratory (Pe_max) pressures are used in the management of respiratory muscle disease. There is little data on the appropriate reference range, success rates, or repeatability of Pi_max and Pe_max in children or on methodological factors affecting test outcomes. Objectives: To determine Pi_max and Pe_max in healthy children and examine which published reference equations are best suited to a contemporary population. Secondary objectives were to assess within-test repeatability and the influence of lung volumes on Pi_max and Pe_max. Methods: Healthy children were prospectively recruited from the community on a volunteer basis and underwent spirometry, static lung volumes, and Pi_max and Pe_max testing. Results: Acceptable and repeatable (to within 20%) Pi_max and Pe_max were obtained in 156 children, with 105 (67%) children performing both Pi_max and Pe_max measurements to within 10% repeatability. The reference equations of Wilson et al. [Thorax 1984;39:535–538] best matched our healthy Caucasian children. There was an inverse relationship between Pi_max and the percent of total lung capacity (TLC) at which the measurement was obtained (beta coefficient –0.96; 95% CI –1.52 to –0.39; p = 0.001), whereas at lung volumes of >80% TLC Pe_max was independent of lung volume (p = 0.26). Conclusion: We demonstrated that the Wilson et al. [Thorax 1984;39:535–538] reference ranges are most suited for contemporary Caucasian Australasian children. However, robust multiethnic reference equations for maximal respiratory pressures are required. This study suggests that 10% within-test repeatability criteria are feasible in clinical practice, and that the use of lung volume measurements will improve the quality of maximal respiratory pressure measurements.

show abstract

“…The methodological approach used by the Task Force is identical to that previously used to develop the Stanojevic et al 'all-age' spirometry reference equations for Caucasians, 2 which we have recently shown to be appropriate for contemporary Australasian subjects. 3 The aim of this analysis was to ascertain how well the new European Respiratory Society GLI 2012 reference ranges fit contemporary Australasian spirometric data. Spirometry outcomes from 2066 Caucasian subjects aged 4-80 years (55% male) collected from 14 centres across Australia and New Zealand were included.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Global Lung Initiative 2012 reference values reflect contemporary Australasian spirometry

et al. 2012

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1 The final equations provided age-, height-, sex-, and ethnic-specific predicted values and lower limits of normal for spirometry. The predicted equations for Caucasians were derived from 55 428 individuals and represent the largest 'all-age' spirometry reference values published to date. The methodological approach used by the Task Force is identical to that previously used to develop the Stanojevic et al. 'all-age' spirometry reference equations for Caucasians, 2 which we have recently shown to be appropriate for contemporary Australasian subjects. 3 The aim of this analysis was to ascertain how well the new European Respiratory Society GLI 2012 reference ranges fit contemporary Australasian spirometric data. Spirometry outcomes from 2066 Caucasian subjects aged 4-80 years (55% male) collected from 14 centres across Australia and New Zealand were included.3 Height-, age-and gender-specific Z-scores for forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), forced vital capacity (FVC), forced expiratory flows between 25% and 75% of FVC (FEF25-75) and FEV1/FVC were calculated for GLI 2012 equations using custom-made software. 4 We defined the minimum physiologically relevant difference to be 0.5 Z-scores, equating to a difference of~6% predicted.Mean (SD) Z-scores for the contemporary Australasian data were 0.23 (1.00) for FEV1, 0.23 (1.00) for FVC, -0.03 (0.87) for FEV1/FVC and 0.07 (0.95) for FEF25-75, all of which were well within range considered to be physiologically irrelevant. The mean Z-score differences equated to absolute and percent predicted differences of 89 mL and 3%, respectively, for FEV1, 117 mL and 3.2% for FVC, 127 mL/s, and 5.9% for FEF25-75 and a difference in FEV1/FVC of -0.49%. Although there were some weak, albeit statistically significant, associations between the spirometry Z-scores and age, height and sex or a combination of

show abstract

The all‐age spirometry reference ranges reflect contemporary Australasian spirometry

Cited by 39 publications

References 24 publications

The multi‐ethnic global lung initiative 2012 (GLI-2012) norms reflect contemporary adult's Algerian spirometry

The multi‐ethnic global lung initiative 2012 (GLI-2012) norms reflect contemporary adult's Algerian spirometry

Characterization of Maximal Respiratory Pressures in Healthy Children

The Global Lung Initiative 2012 reference values reflect contemporary Australasian spirometry

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About