Abstract
Fifty lung function laboratories in England and Wales analysed test gas mixtures of carbon monoxide and helium. Most of them also analysed mixtures of oxygen and carbon dioxide in nitrogen. The percentage accuracy of the results was within 1% of the expected value in only 14% of determinations of carbon monoxide concentration, 28% for carbon dioxide, 37% for helium, and 48% for oxygen. The accuracy of ratios of two concentrations of helium and carbon monoxide was better than that of the individual gas samples. Overall the variation in results between laboratories was wide, the coefficient of variation ranging from about 3% for analysis of helium to 9% for carbon dioxide. This variation affected the values calculated for carbon monoxide transfer factor, where 20% were in error by more than 5%, and for the calculated value of the respiratory exchange ratio, where the interlaboratory coefficient of variation was about 10%. Errors in analysis were due to unsatisfactory calibration of analysers; five oxygen analysers had large zero errors; five carbon monoxide analysers and one helium analyser had notably curvilinear calibration curves. Insufficient information was obtained to ascertain the nature of the errors in analysis of carbon dioxide. Given the improvements in instrumentation, these results are evidence for deterioration in analytical standards in lung function laboratories from the standards of 20 years ago.
Full text
PDF
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- COTES J. E. Effect of variability in gas analysis on the reproducibility of the pulmonary diffusing capacity by the single breath method. Thorax. 1963 Jun;18:151–154. doi: 10.1136/thx.18.2.151. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Ferris B. G. Epidemiology Standardization Project (American Thoracic Society). Am Rev Respir Dis. 1978 Dec;118(6 Pt 2):1–120. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Saunders K. B. Current practice in six London lung function laboratories. Proc R Soc Med. 1977 Mar;70(3):162–163. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]