Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Is my lung function really that good? Flow-type spirometer problems that elevate test results.

Mary C Townsend1, John L Hankinson, Larry A Lindesmith

  • 1M.C. Townsend Associates, Pittsburgh, PA 15228-1824, USA. mary.townsend4@verizon.net

Chest
|May 12, 2004
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Are "Race-Neutral" lung volume prediction equations appropriate? A critical review of the contributions of anthropometric differences and socioeconomic factors to lung volumes.

The European respiratory journal·2026
Same author

Impacts of Altering Spirometric Prediction Equations in Occupational Health.

Journal of occupational and environmental medicine·2025
Same author

Spirometry in 2022: Is a Single Set of Prediction Equations for All the Best Path Forward?

American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine·2023
Same author

Residential Wood Burning and Pulmonary Function in the Agricultural Lung Health Study.

Environmental health perspectives·2022
Same author

U.S. Occupational Historical Perspective on Race and Lung Function.

American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine·2022
Same author

Reply by Elmaleh-Sachs <i>et al</i>. to Townsend and Cowl, and to Miller <i>et al.</i>

American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine·2022
Same journal

The effect of a two-day stay at high altitude (2500 m) on right ventricular afterload and oxygen delivery in patients with pulmonary vascular disease A randomized controlled crossover trial.

Chest·2026
Same journal

A Comparative Study of Radiation Exposure in Conventional and Robotic Bronchoscopy.

Chest·2026
Same journal

Independent Prognostic Contributions of Anti-Ro52 and Anti-MDA5 in Autoimmune-Associated Interstitial Lung Disease.

Chest·2026
Same journal

Lung aeration and gas exchange in SGA or AGA infants with moderate-severe BPD: secondary analysis of the PATH-BPD study.

Chest·2026
Same journal

Lung Cancer Incidence and Mortality after Negative Low-Dose CT Screening Results.

Chest·2026
Same journal

Symptom prevalence and impact on lung cancer risk in the SUMMIT study.

Chest·2026
See all related articles

Spirometer calibration doesn't prevent errors that inflate lung function test results. Recognizing and removing these spurious spirometry readings is crucial for accurate medical clearance and diagnosis.

Area of Science:

  • Pulmonary Function Testing
  • Occupational Medicine
  • Medical Device Quality Assurance

Background:

  • Spirometry accuracy is typically assumed to be maintained through regular calibration.
  • However, flow-type spirometer sensors can develop errors during testing, leading to falsely elevated results.
  • These errors are often overlooked despite recent calibration.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To highlight unrecognized spirometry errors that can significantly elevate test results.
  • To present examples of anomalous spirograms and data caused by sensor inaccuracies.
  • To emphasize the importance of identifying and correcting these errors in clinical practice.

Main Methods:

  • Review of quality assurance spirograms from occupational and hospital settings.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Identification of anomalous spirograms and test results.
  • Analysis of potential causes for spurious readings, including zeroing errors and sensor issues.

    • Main Results:

    • Identified errors caused by inaccurate zeroing, condensation, mucus, or unstable calibration in flow-type spirometers.
    • Observed elevations in Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) to 144-204% of predicted values.
    • Estimated that 40% of subjects in respirator clearance programs had FVC and FEV1 > 120% of predicted due to these errors.

    Conclusions:

    • Falsely elevated spirometry results can lead to misinterpretations, particularly false-negative findings.
    • Awareness of potential spirometer errors and their appearance in spirograms is essential for all users.
    • Systematic review and deletion of erroneous data are necessary for reliable pulmonary function assessment.