ArticleTuberkuloz ve toraks2023
Determining factors affecting the acceptability of spirometry: A survey study in a tertiary chest diseases center.
Article in Tuberkuloz ve toraks, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Conformity of spirometric tests with acceptability criteria and assessment of confounding factors in routine clinical practice.Annals of thoracic medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Unlike other laboratory tests, spirometry requires the participant’s full compliance with the maneuvers in the test for an acceptable test result. In this study, we aimed to determine the suitability of spirometric tests regarding acceptability and the factors associated with acceptability. Materials and Methods: Before the test, our 15-scale questionnaire, prepared by us in the respiratory function laboratory, was applied to the participants who requested spirometric examination in our hospital. Afterwards, patients were subjected to spirometric analysis. Spirogram results of the participants were evaluated by four clinicians who were experts in the field based on the acceptability criteria in the American Thoracic Society and European Respiratory Society Spirometry Standardization Guidelines. Participants were divided into two groups as those who met the acceptability criteria and those who did not. Both groups were compared regarding demographic data, comorbidities, education levels, and questions in the questionnaire. Results: The acceptability spirometry rate was 71.2%. The most common error among those who could not perform an acceptable test was the inability to complete the expiratory time to the time that would create a plateau, with 37.3%. Education level and acceptability of spirometry were not related (p= 0.228). Asthma was statistically significantly higher in the group that performed acceptable spirometry (p= 0.049). Acceptable spirometry rate was statistically significantly higher in the participants who had previously performed spirometric tests compared to the other group (p< 0.001). The test success of the participants who did not have success anxiety about the test was significantly higher than the other group (p= 0.033). Conclusion: Reduction of participants’ anxiety and repetitive testing increases test acceptability. For this reason, in our clinical practice, we recommend that people who want a spirometry test relieve their anxiety about the test and repeat the test in unacceptable tests.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.