No abstract

No abstract

BACKGROUND: Assessment of the degree of air-flow obstruction is important for determining the treatment strategy in COPD patients. However, in some elderly COPD patients, measuring FVC is impossible because of cognitive dysfunction or severe dyspnea. In such patients a simple test of airways obstruction requiring only a short run of tidal breathing would be useful. We studied whether the spontaneous expiratory flow-volume (SEFV) curve pattern reflects the degree of airflow obstruction in elderly COPD patients. METHODS: In 34 elderly subjects (mean ؎ SD age 80 ؎ 7 y) with stable COPD (percent-of-predicted FEV 1 39.0 ؎ 18.5%), and 12 age-matched healthy subjects, we measured FVC and recorded flow-volume curves during quiet breathing. We studied the SEFV curve patterns (concavity/convexity), spirometry results, breathing patterns, and demographics. The SEFV curve concavity/convexity prediction accuracy was examined by calculating the receiver operating characteristic curves, cutoff values, area under the curve, sensitivity, and specificity. RESULTS: Fourteen subjects with COPD had a concave SEFV curve. All the healthy subjects had convex SEFV curves. The COPD subjects who had concave SEFV curves often had very severe airway obstruction. The percent-of-predicted FEV 1 % (32.4%) was the most powerful SEFV curve concavity predictor (area under the curve 0.92, 95% CI 0.83-1.00), and had the highest sensitivity (0.93) and specificity (0.88). CONCLUSIONS: Concavity of the SEFV curve obtained during tidal breathing may be a useful test for determining the presence of very severe obstruction in elderly patients unable to perform a satisfactory FVC maneuver.

Background: Manual chest wall compression (CWC) during expiration is a technique for removing airway secretions in patients with respiratory disorders. However, there have been no reports about the physiological effects of CWC in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Objective: To compare the effects of CWC on expiratory flow rates in patients with COPD and asymptomatic controls. Method: Fourteen subjects were recruited from among patients with COPD who were receiving pulmonary rehabilitation at the University Hospital (COPD group). Fourteen age-matched healthy subjects were also consecutively recruited from the local community (Healthy control group). Airflow and lung volume changes were measured continuously with the subjects lying in supine position during 1 minute of quiet breathing (QB) and during 1 minute of CWC by a physical therapist. Results: During CWC, both the COPD group and the healthy control group showed significantly higher peak expiratory flow rates (PEFRs) than during QB (mean difference for COPD group 0.14 L/sec, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.04 to 0.24, p<0.01, mean difference for healthy control group 0.39 L/sec, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.57, p<0.01). In the between-group comparisons, PEFR was significantly higher in the healthy control group than in the COPD group (-0.25 L/sec, 95% CI -0.43 to -0.07, p<0.01). However, the expiratory flow rates at the lung volume at the PEFR during QB and at 50% and 25% of tidal volume during QB increased in the healthy control group (mean difference for healthy control group 0.31 L/sec, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.47, p<0.01: 0.31 L/sec, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.47, p<0.01: 0.27 L/sec, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.41, p<0.01, respectively) but not in the COPD group (0.05 L/sec, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.12: -0.01 L/sec, 95% CI -0.11 to 0.08: 0.02 L/sec, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.90) with the application of CWC. Conclusion: The effects of chest wall compression on expiratory flow rates was different between COPD patients and asymptomatic controls.