To the top

Page Manager: Webmaster
Last update: 9/11/2012 3:13 PM

Tell a friend about this page
Print version

Restrictive spirometric p… - University of Gothenburg, Sweden Till startsida
To content Read more about how we use cookies on

Restrictive spirometric pattern and true pulmonary restriction in a general population sample aged 50-64 years

Journal article
Authors Kjell Torén
Linus Schiöler
J. Brisman
A. Malinovschi
Anna-Carin Olin
Göran Bergström
Björn Bake
Published in BMC Pulmonary Medicine
Volume 20
Issue 1
ISSN 1471-2466
Publication year 2020
Published at Institute of Medicine, School of Public Health and Community Medicine
Institute of Medicine
Institute of Medicine, Department of Molecular and Clinical Medicine
Language en
Keywords Validity, Restrictive lung disease, RSP, TLC, Reference values, SCAPIS, epidemiology, disease, Respiratory System
Subject categories Respiratory Medicine and Allergy, Epidemiology


Background There is low diagnostic accuracy of the proxy restrictive spirometric pattern (RSP) to identify true pulmonary restriction. This knowledge is based on patients referred for spirometry and total lung volume determination by plethysmograpy, single breath nitrogen washout technique or gas dilution and selected controls. There is, however, a lack of data from general populations analyzing whether RSP is a valid proxy for true pulmonary restriction. We have validated RSP in relation to true pulmonary restriction in a general population where we have access to measurements of total lung capacity (TLC) and spirometry. Methods The data was from the Swedish CArdioPulmonary bioImage Study (SCAPIS Pilot), a general population-based study, comprising 983 adults aged 50-64. All subjects answered a respiratory questionnaire. Forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) and forced vital capacity (FVC) were obtained before and after bronchodilation. TLC and residual volume (RV) was recorded using a body plethysmograph. All lung function values are generally expressed as percent predicted (% predicted) or in relation to lower limits of normal (LLN). True pulmonary restriction was defined as TLC < LLN5 defined as a Z score < - 1.645, i e the fifth percentile. RSP was defined as FEV1/FVC >= LLN and FVC < LLN after bronchodilation. Specificity, sensitivity, positive and negative likelihood ratios were calculated, and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Results The prevalence of true pulmonary restriction was 5.4%, and the prevalence of RSP was 3.4%. The sensitivity of RSP to identify true pulmonary restriction was 0.34 (0.20-0.46), the corresponding specificity was 0.98 (0.97-0.99), and the positive likelihood ratio was 21.1 (11.3-39.4) and the negative likelihood ratio was 0.67 (0.55-0.81). Conclusions RSP has low accuracy for identifying true pulmonary restriction. The results support previous observations that RSP is useful for ruling out true pulmonary restriction.

Page Manager: Webmaster|Last update: 9/11/2012

The University of Gothenburg uses cookies to provide you with the best possible user experience. By continuing on this website, you approve of our use of cookies.  What are cookies?