A Systematic Approach to Multiple Breath Nitrogen Washout Test Quality

Background: Accurate estimates of multiple breath washout (MBW) outcomes require correct operation of the device, appropriate distraction of the subject to ensure they breathe in a manner representative of their relaxed tidal breathing pattern, and appropriate interpretation of the acquired data. Ba...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Jensen, R., Stanojevic, S., Klingel, M., Pizarro, M., Hall, Graham, Ramsey, K., Foong, R., Saunders, C., Robinson, P., Webster, H., Hardaker, K., Kane, M., Ratjen, F.
Format: Journal Article
Published: Public Library of Science 2016
Online Access:http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/54826
_version_ 1848759472222109696
author Jensen, R.
Stanojevic, S.
Klingel, M.
Pizarro, M.
Hall, Graham
Ramsey, K.
Foong, R.
Saunders, C.
Robinson, P.
Webster, H.
Hardaker, K.
Kane, M.
Ratjen, F.
author_facet Jensen, R.
Stanojevic, S.
Klingel, M.
Pizarro, M.
Hall, Graham
Ramsey, K.
Foong, R.
Saunders, C.
Robinson, P.
Webster, H.
Hardaker, K.
Kane, M.
Ratjen, F.
author_sort Jensen, R.
building Curtin Institutional Repository
collection Online Access
description Background: Accurate estimates of multiple breath washout (MBW) outcomes require correct operation of the device, appropriate distraction of the subject to ensure they breathe in a manner representative of their relaxed tidal breathing pattern, and appropriate interpretation of the acquired data. Based on available recommendations for an acceptable MBW test, we aimed to develop a protocol to systematically evaluate MBW measurements based on these criteria. Methods: 50MBWtest occasions were systematically reviewed for technical elements and whether the breathing pattern was representative of relaxed tidal breathing by an experienced MBW operator. The impact of qualitative and quantitative criteria on inter-observer agreement was assessed across eight MBW operators (n = 20 test occasions, compared using a Kappa statistic). Results: Using qualitative criteria, 46/168 trials were rejected: 16.6%were technically unacceptable and 10.7% were excluded due to inappropriate breathing pattern. Reviewer agreement was good using qualitative criteria and further improved with quantitative criteria from (κ = 0.53– 0.83%) to (κ 0.73–0.97%), but at the cost of exclusion of further test occasions in this retrospective data analysis. Conclusions: The application of the systematic review improved inter-observer agreement but did not affect reported MBW outcomes.
first_indexed 2025-11-14T10:00:25Z
format Journal Article
id curtin-20.500.11937-54826
institution Curtin University Malaysia
institution_category Local University
last_indexed 2025-11-14T10:00:25Z
publishDate 2016
publisher Public Library of Science
recordtype eprints
repository_type Digital Repository
spelling curtin-20.500.11937-548262017-09-29T07:02:51Z A Systematic Approach to Multiple Breath Nitrogen Washout Test Quality Jensen, R. Stanojevic, S. Klingel, M. Pizarro, M. Hall, Graham Ramsey, K. Foong, R. Saunders, C. Robinson, P. Webster, H. Hardaker, K. Kane, M. Ratjen, F. Background: Accurate estimates of multiple breath washout (MBW) outcomes require correct operation of the device, appropriate distraction of the subject to ensure they breathe in a manner representative of their relaxed tidal breathing pattern, and appropriate interpretation of the acquired data. Based on available recommendations for an acceptable MBW test, we aimed to develop a protocol to systematically evaluate MBW measurements based on these criteria. Methods: 50MBWtest occasions were systematically reviewed for technical elements and whether the breathing pattern was representative of relaxed tidal breathing by an experienced MBW operator. The impact of qualitative and quantitative criteria on inter-observer agreement was assessed across eight MBW operators (n = 20 test occasions, compared using a Kappa statistic). Results: Using qualitative criteria, 46/168 trials were rejected: 16.6%were technically unacceptable and 10.7% were excluded due to inappropriate breathing pattern. Reviewer agreement was good using qualitative criteria and further improved with quantitative criteria from (κ = 0.53– 0.83%) to (κ 0.73–0.97%), but at the cost of exclusion of further test occasions in this retrospective data analysis. Conclusions: The application of the systematic review improved inter-observer agreement but did not affect reported MBW outcomes. 2016 Journal Article http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/54826 10.1371/journal.pone.0157523 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Public Library of Science fulltext
spellingShingle Jensen, R.
Stanojevic, S.
Klingel, M.
Pizarro, M.
Hall, Graham
Ramsey, K.
Foong, R.
Saunders, C.
Robinson, P.
Webster, H.
Hardaker, K.
Kane, M.
Ratjen, F.
A Systematic Approach to Multiple Breath Nitrogen Washout Test Quality
title A Systematic Approach to Multiple Breath Nitrogen Washout Test Quality
title_full A Systematic Approach to Multiple Breath Nitrogen Washout Test Quality
title_fullStr A Systematic Approach to Multiple Breath Nitrogen Washout Test Quality
title_full_unstemmed A Systematic Approach to Multiple Breath Nitrogen Washout Test Quality
title_short A Systematic Approach to Multiple Breath Nitrogen Washout Test Quality
title_sort systematic approach to multiple breath nitrogen washout test quality
url http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/54826