Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32575171›Full record

ArticleThe Korean journal of internal medicine2021

Cut-off value of FEV1/FEV6 to determine airflow limitation using handheld spirometry in subjects with risk of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Yong Il Hwang, Youlim Kim, Chin Kook Rhee, Deog Kyeom Kim, Yong Bum Park, Kwang Ha Yoo, Ki-Suck Jung, Chang Youl Lee

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Korean journal of internal medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Diagnostic performance of FEVChronic respiratory disease
    Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Yong Il HwangDepartment of Pulmonary, Allergy and Critical Care Medicine, Hallym University Sacred Heart Hospital, Anyang, Korea.
Youlim KimLung Research Institute of Hallym University College of Medicine, Chuncheon, Korea.
Chin Kook RheeDepartment of Pulmonary, Allergy and Critical Care Medicine, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Korea.
Deog Kyeom KimDepartment of Pulmonary, Allergy and Critical Care Medicine, Seoul Metropolitan Government Seoul National University Boramae Medical Center, Seoul, Korea.
Yong Bum ParkDepartment of Pulmonary, Allergy and Critical Care Medicine, Hallym University Kangdong Sacred Heart Hospital, Seoul, Korea.
Kwang Ha YooDepartment of Pulmonary, Allergy and Critical Care Medicine, Konkuk University Medical Center, Seoul, Korea.
Ki-Suck JungDepartment of Pulmonary, Allergy and Critical Care Medicine, Hallym University Sacred Heart Hospital, Anyang, Korea.
Chang Youl LeeLung Research Institute of Hallym University College of Medicine, Chuncheon, Korea.

Funding

Korea Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 2014-P33003-00
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND/

aimsPostbronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1)/forced vital capacity (FVC) less than 0.7 using spirometry is the golden standard to diagnose airf low limitation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Recently, measuring FEV6 has been suggested as an alternative to measure FVC. Studies about the cut-off value for FEV1/FEV6 to diagnose airflow limitation have shown variable results, with values between 0.7 and 0.8. The purpose of this study was to determine the best cut-off value of FEV1/FEV6 to detect airflow limitation using handheld spirometry.

methodsWe recruited subjects over 40 years of age with smoking history over 10 pack-years. Participants underwent measurements with both handheld spirometry and conventional spirometry. We calculated the sensitivity and specificity of the value of FEV1/FEV6 using receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis to obtain the diagnostic accuracy of handheld spirometry to detect airflow limitation.

resultsA total of 290 subjects were enrolled. Their mean age and smoking amount were 63.1 years and 31.6 pack-years, respectively. According to our ROC curve analysis, when FEV1/FEV6 ratio was 73%, sensitivity and specificity were the maximum and the area under the ROC curve was 0.93, showing an excellent diagnostic accuracy. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were 86.7%, 89.7%, 88.0%, and 88.5%, respectively. Participants with FEV1/FEV6 ≤ 73% had lower FEV1 predicted value compared to those with FEV1/FEV6 > 73% (65.4% vs. 86.5%, p < 0.001).

conclusionIn summary, we demonstrate that the value of 73% in FEV1/FEV6 using handheld spirometry has the best sensitivity and specificity to detect airflow limitation in subjects with risk of COPD.

Indexed as

Pulmonary Disease, Chronic ObstructiveChildForced Expiratory VolumeHumansLungSpirometryVital CapacityActive case findingPulmonary disease, chronic obstructiveSensitivity and specificitySpirometry

Identifiers

PMID32575171
PMCPMC8137403

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.