Pulmonary Rehabilitation |

Accuracy of Handheld Spirometry as a Comparable Diagnostic Tool to Pulmonary Function Testing FREE TO VIEW

Jessamine Dacanay, MD; Ma. Encarnita Limpin, MD
Author and Funding Information

Philippine Heart Center, Quezon City, Philippines

Chest. 2013;144(4_MeetingAbstracts):833A. doi:10.1378/chest.1702588
Text Size: A A A
Published online


SESSION TITLE: Physiology/PFTs/Rehabilitation Posters

SESSION TYPE: Original Investigation Poster

PRESENTED ON: Wednesday, October 30, 2013 at 01:30 PM - 02:30 PM

PURPOSE: Assessment of patients with pulmonary illnesses requires objective measurement. However not all areas have PFT. Portable electronic spirometers have been developed, but need further evaluation. The objective of this study is to evaluate the handheld spirometer as a diagnostic tool in comparison to standard pulmonary function testing.

METHODS: A cross-sectional study conducted at the Philippine Heart Center from January 2012 to March 2013. Patients 19 years old and above, who underwent standard pulmonary function testing were included. Patients were requested to undergo handheld spirometry upon their return. Results were interpreted independently.

RESULTS: A total of 395 subjects were included. There was a significant difference in the values of the FVC, FEV1 and FEV1/FVC between handheld spirometer and standard PFT (p 0.00). However, on determining the diagnosis, there was good agreement between the two devices as to diagnosis of normal, obstructive and restrictive lung disease (kappa 0.984, p 0.008). There was also good agreement between the two devices as to classification of mild, moderate and severe for both obstructive (kappa 0.839 + 0.044) and restrictive lung disease (kappa 0.898 + 0.028). The handheld spirometer was noted to be accurate in diagnosing obstructive lung disease (kappa 1.0, sensitivity 100%, specificity 100%, PPV 100%, NPV 100%), but slightly less accurate in diagnosing restrictive lung disease (0.968, sensitivity 97.9%, specificity 100%, PPV 100%, NPV 95.9%).

CONCLUSIONS: The values of FVC, FEV1 and FEV1/FVC obtained using the handheld spirometer may vary significantly from standard PFT, but the handheld spirometer can diagnose normal, restrictive and obstructive lung disease, and classify disease severity as to mild moderate and severe, with good agreement with standard PFT. The handheld spirometer was found to be accurate in diagnosing obstructive lung disease and slightly less accurate in diagnosing restrictive lung disease. The handheld spirometer is a useful diagnostic tool in evaluating lung function.

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: We can recommend the use of the handheld spirometer in diagnosing patients with pulmonary disease, especially in areas without standard pulmonary function testing and also for admitted patients with difficulty ambulating.

DISCLOSURE: The following authors have nothing to disclose: Jessamine Dacanay, Ma. Encarnita Limpin

No Product/Research Disclosure Information




Citing articles are presented as examples only. In non-demo SCM6 implementation, integration with CrossRef’s "Cited By" API will populate this tab (http://www.crossref.org/citedby.html).

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

Find Similar Articles
CHEST Journal Articles
PubMed Articles
  • CHEST Journal
    Print ISSN: 0012-3692
    Online ISSN: 1931-3543