Related Experiment Videos
[Peak expiratory flow rate in 4- to 15-year-old children. Comparison of 3 measuring models]
V Hernando Sastre1, L García-Marcos, J Gómez García
1Departamento de Métodos Cuantitativos para la Economía, Facultad de Económicas, Universidad de Murcia.
Insights
This study found significant differences in peak expiratory flow (PEF) measurements between three devices, with height being the best predictor of PEF. PEF values also differed between sexes, emphasizing the need for consistent device use in monitoring children.
Area of Science:
- Pediatric Pulmonology
- Biomedical Engineering
- Respiratory Physiology
Background:
- Peak expiratory flow (PEF) meters are crucial for monitoring respiratory conditions in children.
- Standardization of PEF measurement devices is essential for accurate and reliable data.
- Previous studies have highlighted variability between different PEF meter models.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare PEF measurements across three distinct PEF meter models, including PF-Control.
- To develop age, height, and chest circumference-based normograms for each device.
- To investigate sex-based differences and mathematical correlations between PEF meter models.
Main Methods:
- PEF was measured in 476 school-children (ages 4-15) using Vitalograph, Mini-Wright, and PF-Control devices.
- Measurements were taken in a rotatory fashion during school hours (3-5 PM).
- The best of three attempts with <10% difference was recorded.
Main Results:
- Significant differences (p < 0.0004) were observed between the three PEF meter models.
- Height was the strongest predictor of PEF (r=0.90-0.92) using an exponential model.
- Significant sex-based differences in PEF were found, irrespective of the device used.
Conclusions:
- Height is the primary determinant of PEF in children.
- PEF values exhibit significant differences between boys and girls.
- Consistent use of the same PEF meter model is recommended for individual child monitoring.
Objective:
a) To establish the possible differences between three different models of PEF-meter, including PF-Control for the first time; b) to build a normogram for each of the three models, as a function of different variables (age, height, and inspiratory and espiratory thoracic circumference); c) to search for differences between both sexes, and d) to study the mathematical correlation between the results yielded by the different models.
Methods:
PEF was measured in a sample of 476 school-children, in the range of 4 and 15 years (233 boys, 243 girls), with a mean age of 9,3 years and a height range between 96,8 cm and 178,8 cm (mean 137,9). PEF value was recorded as the best of three attempts when the difference them was less than 10%. Three devices of each model were used (Vitalograph, Mini-Wright, PF-Control). The utilisation was always done in a rotatory fashion at school time (15-17 hours) in the children's school.
Results:
We found significant differences between the three models (p < 0,0004). The best predictive variable for PEF is height, with an r = 0,90-0,92 (depending on the model) when the exponential model is considered. Independently of the device, there were significant differences between sexes.
Conclusions:
a) The variable that expresses PEF the better is height; b) PEF values are different between girls and boys; c) there were significant differences between the various models; d) Monitoring of a given child must be done with the same model of PEF-meter, and e) The best correlation is obtained with the exponential model, although differences with the lineal model were not statistically significant.