Measuring lung mechanics in patients with COPD using the handheld portable rapid expiratory occlusion monitor (REOM): A cross‐sectional study
Abstract While conventional spirometry is associated with strenuous “forced” maximal respiratory maneuvers and infection control implications, oscillometry is not associated with these issues. However, portability, convenience of use, and interpretation remain common limitations to both techniques....
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wiley
2025-04-01
|
| Series: | Physiological Reports |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.14814/phy2.70307 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1849724695919722496 |
|---|---|
| author | Felix‐Antoine Coutu Dany Malaeb Olivia C. Iorio Seyedfakhreddin Nabavi Tom McFarland Lennart K. A. Lundblad Ron J. Dandurand Stewart B. Gottfried Bryan A. Ross |
| author_facet | Felix‐Antoine Coutu Dany Malaeb Olivia C. Iorio Seyedfakhreddin Nabavi Tom McFarland Lennart K. A. Lundblad Ron J. Dandurand Stewart B. Gottfried Bryan A. Ross |
| author_sort | Felix‐Antoine Coutu |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract While conventional spirometry is associated with strenuous “forced” maximal respiratory maneuvers and infection control implications, oscillometry is not associated with these issues. However, portability, convenience of use, and interpretation remain common limitations to both techniques. This study tested the concordance and agreement between resistance measurements obtained from the handheld portable REOM device (Reo‐f, Reo‐s) with those from conventional oscillometry (R19, R5) in PFT‐confirmed “mild” (GOLD 1) and “very severe” (GOLD 4) COPD. Unadjusted and adjusted concordance (Spearman correlation) and agreement (Bland–Altman tests) served as co‐primary outcomes. Discrimination between GOLD 1 and 4 COPD (Wilcoxon rank sum test, Support Vector Machine (SVM) classifier) and patient user experience (System Utility Scale (SUS), Participant Satisfaction Survey (PSS)) served as secondary outcomes. In 17 participants (GOLD 1 n = 9, GOLD 4 n = 8), adjusted R5‐Reo‐s (0.95 [0.81, 0.98]) and R19‐Reo‐f (0.93 [0.79, 0.99]) correlations were very strong, as was agreement (mean differences: −0.07, 0.08, respectively). Statistically significant between‐group differences were observed for all four resistance parameters. Reo‐s in particular exhibited perfect discrimination between GOLD 1 and 4 disease, with some minor misclassification by Reo‐f, R5 (n = 1 each) and R19 (n = 4). User experience scores were excellent. These results support the capacity for REOM as a novel, complementary diagnostic device in COPD. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-849e8a52a86f4130b903b5a6a3a9c972 |
| institution | DOAJ |
| issn | 2051-817X |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2025-04-01 |
| publisher | Wiley |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Physiological Reports |
| spelling | doaj-art-849e8a52a86f4130b903b5a6a3a9c9722025-08-20T03:10:39ZengWileyPhysiological Reports2051-817X2025-04-01137n/an/a10.14814/phy2.70307Measuring lung mechanics in patients with COPD using the handheld portable rapid expiratory occlusion monitor (REOM): A cross‐sectional studyFelix‐Antoine Coutu0Dany Malaeb1Olivia C. Iorio2Seyedfakhreddin Nabavi3Tom McFarland4Lennart K. A. Lundblad5Ron J. Dandurand6Stewart B. Gottfried7Bryan A. Ross8Respiratory Epidemiology and Clinical Research Unit, Centre for Outcomes Research and Evaluation Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre Montreal Quebec CanadaRespiratory Epidemiology and Clinical Research Unit, Centre for Outcomes Research and Evaluation Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre Montreal Quebec CanadaRespiratory Epidemiology and Clinical Research Unit, Centre for Outcomes Research and Evaluation Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre Montreal Quebec CanadaRespiratory Epidemiology and Clinical Research Unit, Centre for Outcomes Research and Evaluation Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre Montreal Quebec CanadaRespiratory Epidemiology and Clinical Research Unit, Centre for Outcomes Research and Evaluation Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre Montreal Quebec CanadaMeakins‐Christie Laboratories, McGill University Montreal Quebec CanadaDepartment of Medicine McGill University Montreal Quebec CanadaDepartment of Medicine McGill University Montreal Quebec CanadaRespiratory Epidemiology and Clinical Research Unit, Centre for Outcomes Research and Evaluation Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre Montreal Quebec CanadaAbstract While conventional spirometry is associated with strenuous “forced” maximal respiratory maneuvers and infection control implications, oscillometry is not associated with these issues. However, portability, convenience of use, and interpretation remain common limitations to both techniques. This study tested the concordance and agreement between resistance measurements obtained from the handheld portable REOM device (Reo‐f, Reo‐s) with those from conventional oscillometry (R19, R5) in PFT‐confirmed “mild” (GOLD 1) and “very severe” (GOLD 4) COPD. Unadjusted and adjusted concordance (Spearman correlation) and agreement (Bland–Altman tests) served as co‐primary outcomes. Discrimination between GOLD 1 and 4 COPD (Wilcoxon rank sum test, Support Vector Machine (SVM) classifier) and patient user experience (System Utility Scale (SUS), Participant Satisfaction Survey (PSS)) served as secondary outcomes. In 17 participants (GOLD 1 n = 9, GOLD 4 n = 8), adjusted R5‐Reo‐s (0.95 [0.81, 0.98]) and R19‐Reo‐f (0.93 [0.79, 0.99]) correlations were very strong, as was agreement (mean differences: −0.07, 0.08, respectively). Statistically significant between‐group differences were observed for all four resistance parameters. Reo‐s in particular exhibited perfect discrimination between GOLD 1 and 4 disease, with some minor misclassification by Reo‐f, R5 (n = 1 each) and R19 (n = 4). User experience scores were excellent. These results support the capacity for REOM as a novel, complementary diagnostic device in COPD.https://doi.org/10.14814/phy2.70307chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)handheld portable deviceinterrupter techniqueoscillometryrespiratory resistance |
| spellingShingle | Felix‐Antoine Coutu Dany Malaeb Olivia C. Iorio Seyedfakhreddin Nabavi Tom McFarland Lennart K. A. Lundblad Ron J. Dandurand Stewart B. Gottfried Bryan A. Ross Measuring lung mechanics in patients with COPD using the handheld portable rapid expiratory occlusion monitor (REOM): A cross‐sectional study Physiological Reports chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) handheld portable device interrupter technique oscillometry respiratory resistance |
| title | Measuring lung mechanics in patients with COPD using the handheld portable rapid expiratory occlusion monitor (REOM): A cross‐sectional study |
| title_full | Measuring lung mechanics in patients with COPD using the handheld portable rapid expiratory occlusion monitor (REOM): A cross‐sectional study |
| title_fullStr | Measuring lung mechanics in patients with COPD using the handheld portable rapid expiratory occlusion monitor (REOM): A cross‐sectional study |
| title_full_unstemmed | Measuring lung mechanics in patients with COPD using the handheld portable rapid expiratory occlusion monitor (REOM): A cross‐sectional study |
| title_short | Measuring lung mechanics in patients with COPD using the handheld portable rapid expiratory occlusion monitor (REOM): A cross‐sectional study |
| title_sort | measuring lung mechanics in patients with copd using the handheld portable rapid expiratory occlusion monitor reom a cross sectional study |
| topic | chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) handheld portable device interrupter technique oscillometry respiratory resistance |
| url | https://doi.org/10.14814/phy2.70307 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT felixantoinecoutu measuringlungmechanicsinpatientswithcopdusingthehandheldportablerapidexpiratoryocclusionmonitorreomacrosssectionalstudy AT danymalaeb measuringlungmechanicsinpatientswithcopdusingthehandheldportablerapidexpiratoryocclusionmonitorreomacrosssectionalstudy AT oliviaciorio measuringlungmechanicsinpatientswithcopdusingthehandheldportablerapidexpiratoryocclusionmonitorreomacrosssectionalstudy AT seyedfakhreddinnabavi measuringlungmechanicsinpatientswithcopdusingthehandheldportablerapidexpiratoryocclusionmonitorreomacrosssectionalstudy AT tommcfarland measuringlungmechanicsinpatientswithcopdusingthehandheldportablerapidexpiratoryocclusionmonitorreomacrosssectionalstudy AT lennartkalundblad measuringlungmechanicsinpatientswithcopdusingthehandheldportablerapidexpiratoryocclusionmonitorreomacrosssectionalstudy AT ronjdandurand measuringlungmechanicsinpatientswithcopdusingthehandheldportablerapidexpiratoryocclusionmonitorreomacrosssectionalstudy AT stewartbgottfried measuringlungmechanicsinpatientswithcopdusingthehandheldportablerapidexpiratoryocclusionmonitorreomacrosssectionalstudy AT bryanaross measuringlungmechanicsinpatientswithcopdusingthehandheldportablerapidexpiratoryocclusionmonitorreomacrosssectionalstudy |