Performance evaluation of contemporary spirometers.

A comprehensive evaluation of 62 spirometers from 37 different sources was performed using a two-part protocol: calibrated syringe, and dynamic waveform testing. All testing was done with ambient air. Calibrated syringe testing examined the ability of the spirometers to accurately measure the output of a 3 L calibrating syringe under varying conditions. The accuracy, FVC volume linearity, and stability of each spirometer was determined from these data. All but five of 42 spirometers accurately measured a 3 L calibrating syringe to within +/- 3 percent. Dynamic waveform testing consisted of introducing 24 standard waveforms into the spirometer from a computer-controlled air pump. The values of FVC, FEV1, and FEF25-75% were compared to the actual values for each waveform to determine a performance rating. Only 35 (56.5 percent) of the spirometers performed acceptably when measuring the 24 standard waveforms. Nine (14.5 percent) were marginal and 18 (29.0 percent) were unacceptable. Fifty-nine (95 percent) of the 62 spirometers were computerized. Software errors were found in 25 percent of the computerized systems evaluated. Although using a 3 L syringe for quality control purposes is essential, simple testing of spirometers with a 3 L calibrating syringe for validation purposes was inadequate to assess spirometer performance when compared to dynamic waveform testing. Dynamic waveform testing is essential to accurately measure and validate acceptability of spirometer system performance.

[1]  L. Johnson,et al.  Clinical pulmonary function testing in dogs and cats. , 1992, The Veterinary clinics of North America. Small animal practice.

[2]  R M Gardner,et al.  Turbine flowmeter vs. Fleisch pneumotachometer: a comparative study for exercise testing. , 1987, Journal of applied physiology.

[3]  K. Gunawardena,et al.  Evaluation of the turbine pocket spirometer. , 1987, Thorax.

[4]  S. Nelson Commercially available spirometers: a performance evaluation; , 1987 .

[5]  D. Hess,et al.  An evaluation of the respiradyne II spirometer , 1987 .

[6]  R. Crapo,et al.  A computer system for analysis and transmission of spirometry waveforms using volume sampling. , 1984, Computers and biomedical research, an international journal.

[7]  J. Hankinson,et al.  Dynamic BTPS correction factors for spirometric data. , 1983, Journal of applied physiology: respiratory, environmental and exercise physiology.

[8]  J. Hankinson,et al.  Spirometry: what paper speed? , 1983, Chest.

[9]  R M Gardner,et al.  Standard waveforms for spirometer testing. , 2015, The American review of respiratory disease.

[10]  H. Glindmeyer,et al.  A compact computer printer for quality control spirometric data collection. , 1982, Journal of occupational medicine. : official publication of the Industrial Medical Association.

[11]  R M Gardner,et al.  Evaluating commercially available spirometers. , 2015, The American review of respiratory disease.

[12]  ATS statement--Snowbird workshop on standardization of spirometry. , 1979, The American review of respiratory disease.

[13]  W. Morgan,et al.  The assessment of ventilatory capacity. Statement of the Committees on Environmental Health and Respiratory Physiology, American College of Chest Physicians. , 1975, Chest.

[14]  E. Gaensler,et al.  Evaluation of "electronic" spirometers. , 1973, The New England journal of medicine.