PEDIATRICS Vol. 85 No. 5 May 1990, pp. 768-773
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow P3Rs: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when P3Rs are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow E-mail 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 File Cabinet
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Pattishall, E. N.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Pattishall, E. N.

Pulmonary Function Testing Reference Values and Interpretations in Pediatric Training Programs

Edward N. Pattishall MD, MPH1

1 From the Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA

A questionnaire was sent to all pediatric training programs to evaluate the use of pulmonary function reference standards and the interpretation of pulmonary function test results. Responses were obtained from 107 of 130 institutions, and 94 of these had pulmonary function laboratories available. Of the 94, 60 used one of three reference standards. The primary reason the reference standards were chosen was either unknown or because they came with the spirometer (24), were recommended by another person or were those used in that person's training (34), or were thought to be the best standards available or most applicable to the population to be tested (31). To define abnormality, most used an 80% predicted cutoff for forced vital capacity, forced expiratory volume in 1 second, and forced expiratory flow at 25% to 75% vital capacity. For a change in an individual through time, most used a 10% change for forced vital capacity, forced expiratory volume in 1 second, and forced expiratory flow at 25% to 75% vital capacity. Thirteen used statistical methods to define abnormal individuals and none used statistical methods to define a significant change over time. Although there are a few guidelines for reference standards and interpretations of pulmonary function tests, it appears that most laboratories are not using those guidelines and that further guidelines and education are needed.

Key Words: Respiratory function tests • standards • reference standards

Submitted on March 14, 1989
Accepted on April 21, 1989




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 PediatricsHome page
L. B. Gerald, R. Grad, A. Turner-Henson, C. Hains, S. Tang, R. Feinstein, K. Wille, S. Erwin, and W. C. Bailey
Validation of a Multistage Asthma Case-Detection Procedure for Elementary School Children
Pediatrics, October 1, 2004; 114(4): e459 - e468.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]