Chest Email Content Delivery
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Guest Access | Sign In via User Name/Password
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Free
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Article Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Cho, S.-I.
Right arrow Articles by Christiani, D. C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Cho, S.-I.
Right arrow Articles by Christiani, D. C.
(Chest. 1997;112:1547-1553.)
© 1997 American College of Chest Physicians

Reproducibility of Nasal Peak Inspiratory Flow Among Healthy Adults

Assessment of Epidemiologic Utility

Sung-Il Cho MD1; Russ Hauser MD, ScD, MPH1; and David C. Christiani MD, MPH, FCCP1

1 From the Occupational Health Program, Department of Environmental Health, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston

Study objective: To assess the reproducibility of nasal peak inspiratory flow (PIFn).

Participants: Twelve healthy nonsmoking volunteers were studied.

Methods: Repeated measurements of PIFn and oral (PIFm) peak inspiratory flow were performed for 5 consecutive days. Two methods of inhalation were compared. In the residual volume (RV) method, the forced maximal inspiratory maneuver was initiated from the end of a maximal expiration, while in the functional residual capacity (FRC) method, the maneuver was from the end of a tidal breath. Reproducibility was assessed by the intraclass correlation coefficient. Time trend for the 5 days was assessed by random effect models adjusting for different baseline for each subject.

Results: The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) of PIFn was 0.89 (lower limit of one-sided 95% confidence interval is 0.80) by the RV method and 0.78 (95% lower limit is 0.63) by the FRC method, suggesting that both methods have good reproducibility. These were similar to the ICCs of PIFm by each method. The FRC method did not show a significant time trend for PIFn. The RV method had a small, but significant, decreasing time trend of a magnitude considered inconsequential for the purpose of epidemiologic study.

Conclusion: PIFn, measured from either RV or from FRC, showed good reproducibility and can be employed in epidemiologic studies investigating the upper airways' response to air pollutant exposure. Further studies of the relationships between PIFn and signs and symptoms of rhinitis are needed to evaluate the utility of this test for clinical and epidemiologic use.

Key Words: intraclass correlation • nasal peak inspiratory flow • reproducibility

Submitted on January 23, 1997
Accepted on May 8, 1997




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 ChestHome page
M. Rappai, N. Collop, S. Kemp, and R. deShazo
The Nose and Sleep-Disordered Breathing: What We Know and What We Do Not Know
Chest, December 1, 2003; 124(6): 2309 - 2323.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Eur Respir JHome page
P.W. Barry, N.P. Mason, and J-P. Richalet
Nasal peak inspiratory flow at altitude
Eur. Respir. J., January 1, 2002; 19(1): 16 - 19.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1997 by the American College of Chest Physicians.