Advanced

Oscillometry in Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease : In vitro and in vivo evaluation of the impulse oscillometry and tremoflo devices

Lundblad, Lennart K.A. LU ; Miletic, Ruzica ; Piitulainen, Eeva LU and Wollmer, Per LU (2019) In Scientific Reports 9(1).
Abstract

Impedance, or oscillometry, measurements of the respiratory system can generate information about the function of the respiratory system not possible with traditional spirometry. There are currently several instruments on the market using different perturbations. We have compared a new respiratory oscillometry instrument, the tremoflo, with Impulse Oscillometry (IOS). Patients with a physician’s diagnosis of chronic obstructive lung disease (COPD) and healthy subjects were recruited. They underwent assessment of respiratory function with oscillometry using the IOS and tremoflo devices and the resulting impedance data from the two methods were compared. The two devices were also tested against a reference respiratory phantom with... (More)

Impedance, or oscillometry, measurements of the respiratory system can generate information about the function of the respiratory system not possible with traditional spirometry. There are currently several instruments on the market using different perturbations. We have compared a new respiratory oscillometry instrument, the tremoflo, with Impulse Oscillometry (IOS). Patients with a physician’s diagnosis of chronic obstructive lung disease (COPD) and healthy subjects were recruited. They underwent assessment of respiratory function with oscillometry using the IOS and tremoflo devices and the resulting impedance data from the two methods were compared. The two devices were also tested against a reference respiratory phantom with variable resistances. Whereas both devices detected impairments in the patients’ lung function commensurate with small airways pathology, the tremoflo appeared to be more sensitive than the IOS. We found systematic differences between the two instruments especially for reactance measurements where the area over the reactance curve (AX) was significantly lower with the IOS compared with the tremoflo (p < 0.001). Moreover, the agreement between the two devices was reduced with increasing severity of the disease as determined with a Bland-Altman test. Testing both instruments against a respiratory phantom unit confirmed that the resistance measured by the tremoflo compares closely with the known resistance of test loads, whereas the IOS’ resistance correlated with a test load of 0.19, kPa.s.L−1 at higher loads it deviated significantly from the known resistance (p < 0.0028). We conclude that the absolute values measured with the two devices may not be directly comparable and suggest that differences in the calibration procedures might account for the differences.

(Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
in
Scientific Reports
volume
9
issue
1
article number
11618
publisher
Nature Publishing Group
external identifiers
  • pmid:31406190
  • scopus:85070589149
ISSN
2045-2322
DOI
10.1038/s41598-019-48039-x
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
8a5c6fdf-ed01-4a11-8a6d-92bad8c2eaac
date added to LUP
2019-08-30 12:34:08
date last changed
2020-07-08 05:02:41
@article{8a5c6fdf-ed01-4a11-8a6d-92bad8c2eaac,
  abstract     = {<p>Impedance, or oscillometry, measurements of the respiratory system can generate information about the function of the respiratory system not possible with traditional spirometry. There are currently several instruments on the market using different perturbations. We have compared a new respiratory oscillometry instrument, the tremoflo, with Impulse Oscillometry (IOS). Patients with a physician’s diagnosis of chronic obstructive lung disease (COPD) and healthy subjects were recruited. They underwent assessment of respiratory function with oscillometry using the IOS and tremoflo devices and the resulting impedance data from the two methods were compared. The two devices were also tested against a reference respiratory phantom with variable resistances. Whereas both devices detected impairments in the patients’ lung function commensurate with small airways pathology, the tremoflo appeared to be more sensitive than the IOS. We found systematic differences between the two instruments especially for reactance measurements where the area over the reactance curve (AX) was significantly lower with the IOS compared with the tremoflo (p &lt; 0.001). Moreover, the agreement between the two devices was reduced with increasing severity of the disease as determined with a Bland-Altman test. Testing both instruments against a respiratory phantom unit confirmed that the resistance measured by the tremoflo compares closely with the known resistance of test loads, whereas the IOS’ resistance correlated with a test load of 0.19, kPa.s.L<sup>−1</sup> at higher loads it deviated significantly from the known resistance (p &lt; 0.0028). We conclude that the absolute values measured with the two devices may not be directly comparable and suggest that differences in the calibration procedures might account for the differences.</p>},
  author       = {Lundblad, Lennart K.A. and Miletic, Ruzica and Piitulainen, Eeva and Wollmer, Per},
  issn         = {2045-2322},
  language     = {eng},
  month        = {12},
  number       = {1},
  publisher    = {Nature Publishing Group},
  series       = {Scientific Reports},
  title        = {Oscillometry in Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease : In vitro and in vivo evaluation of the impulse oscillometry and tremoflo devices},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-48039-x},
  doi          = {10.1038/s41598-019-48039-x},
  volume       = {9},
  year         = {2019},
}