UCL Discovery
UCL home » Library Services » Electronic resources » UCL Discovery

Quality control for multiple breath washout tests in multicentre bronchiectasis studies: Experiences from the BRONCH-UK clinimetrics study

O'Neill, K; Lakshmipathy, GR; Ferguson, K; Cosgrove, D; Hill, AT; Loebinger, MR; Carroll, M; ... Bradley, JM; + view all (2018) Quality control for multiple breath washout tests in multicentre bronchiectasis studies: Experiences from the BRONCH-UK clinimetrics study. Respiratory Medicine , 145 pp. 206-211. 10.1016/j.rmed.2018.10.030. Green open access

[thumbnail of Hurst_2FINAL 21022018_Quality control of MBW in BE studies.pdf]
Preview
Text
Hurst_2FINAL 21022018_Quality control of MBW in BE studies.pdf - Accepted Version

Download (508kB) | Preview

Abstract

Multiple Breath Washout (MBW) to measure Lung Clearance Index (LCI) is increasingly being used as a secondary endpoint in multicentre bronchiectasis studies. LCI data quality control or “over-reading” is resource intensive and the impact is unclear. Objectives: To assess the proportion of MBW tests deemed unacceptable with over-reading, and to assess the change in LCI (number of turnovers), LCI coefficient of variation (CV%) and tidal volume (VT) CV% results after over-reading. Methods: Data were analysed from 250 MBW tests (from 98 adult bronchiectasis patients) collected as part of the Bronch-UK Clinimetrics study in 5 UK centres. Each MBW test was over-read centrally using pre-defined criteria. MBW tests with <2 technically valid and repeatable trials were deemed unacceptable to include in analysis. In accepted tests, values for LCI, LCI CV% and VT CV% before and after over-reading, were compared. Results: Insufficient data was collected in 10/250 tests. With over-reading, 30/240 (12%) were deemed unacceptable to include in analysis. In those accepted tests, overall the change in LCI, LCI CV% and VT CV% with over-reading was not statistically significant. When MBW new sites were compared to MBW expert sites, the change in LCI with over-reading was significantly greater in MBW new sites (p = 0.047). Data suggests that over-reading could be important up to at least 12 months post initiation of MBW activity. Conclusion: MBW over-reading was important in this study as 12% of tests were considered unacceptable. Over-reading improved test result accuracy in sites new to MBW.

Type: Article
Title: Quality control for multiple breath washout tests in multicentre bronchiectasis studies: Experiences from the BRONCH-UK clinimetrics study
Open access status: An open access version is available from UCL Discovery
DOI: 10.1016/j.rmed.2018.10.030
Publisher version: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rmed.2018.10.030
Language: English
Additional information: This version is the author accepted manuscript. For information on re-use, please refer to the publisher’s terms and conditions.
Keywords: Bronchiectasis, Multiple breath washout, Lung clearance index, Over-reading, Quality control
UCL classification: UCL
UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences
UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Medical Sciences
UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Medical Sciences > Div of Medicine
UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Medical Sciences > Div of Medicine > Respiratory Medicine
URI: https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10064278
Downloads since deposit
73Downloads
Download activity - last month
Download activity - last 12 months
Downloads by country - last 12 months

Archive Staff Only

View Item View Item