↓ Skip to main content

Assessment of Airway Distensibility by the Forced Oscillation Technique: Reproducible and Potentially Simplifiable

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Physiology, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
12 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Assessment of Airway Distensibility by the Forced Oscillation Technique: Reproducible and Potentially Simplifiable
Published in
Frontiers in Physiology, April 2017
DOI 10.3389/fphys.2017.00223
Pubmed ID
Authors

Samuel Mailhot-Larouche, Mélanie Lachance, Michela Bullone, Cyndi Henry, Ronald J. Dandurand, Louis-Philippe Boulet, Michel Laviolette, Gregory G. King, Claude S. Farah, Ynuk Bossé

Abstract

A non-invasive index of airway distensibility is required to track airway remodeling over time. The forced oscillation technique (FOT) provides such an index by measuring the change in respiratory system conductance at 5 Hz over the corresponding change in lung volume (ΔGrs5/ΔVL). To become useful clinically, this method has to be reproducible and easy to perform. The series of breathing maneuvers required to measure distensibility would be greatly facilitated if the difficulty of breathing below functional residual capacity (FRC) could be precluded and the number of maneuvers could be reduced. The distensibility at lung volumes below FRC is also reduced by several confounders, suggesting that excluding data points below FRC should provide a better surrogate for airway remodeling. The objectives of this study were to investigate the reproducibility of airway distensibility measured by FOT and to assess whether the method could be simplified to increase feasibility. Distensibility was measured at three separate occasions in 13 healthy volunteers. At each visit, three deflationary maneuvers were performed, each consisting of tidal breathing from total lung capacity (TLC) to residual volume by slowly decreasing the end-expiratory volume on each subsequent breath. Distensibility was calculated by using either all data points from TLC to residual volume (RV) or only data points from TLC to FRC for either all three or only the first two deflationary maneuvers. Intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC) were used to assess reproducibility and Bland-Altman analyses were used to assess the level of agreement between the differently calculated values of distensibility. The results indicate that distensibility calculated using all data points is reproducible (ICC = 0.64). Using data points from TLC to FRC slightly improved reproducibility (ICC = 0.68) and increased distensibility by 19.4%, which was expected as distensibility above FRC should not be affected by confounders. Using only data points within the first two maneuvers did not affect reproducibility when tested between TLC and FRC (ICC = 0.66). We conclude that a valuable measure of airway distensibility could potentially be obtained with only two deflationary maneuvers that do not require breathing below FRC. This simplified method would increase feasibility without compromising reproducibility.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 12 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 12 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 2 17%
Student > Master 2 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 17%
Student > Bachelor 1 8%
Professor 1 8%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 50%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 8%
Unknown 4 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 April 2017.
All research outputs
#6,085,943
of 22,963,381 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#2,766
of 13,715 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#97,541
of 310,001 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#52
of 228 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,963,381 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,715 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 310,001 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 228 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.