Evidence Hub

Diagnosing asthma in general practice with portable exhaled nitric oxide measurement--results of a prospective diagnostic study: FENO < or = 16 ppb better than FENO < or =12 ppb to rule out mild and moderate to severe asthma [added].

Schneider A, Tilemann L, Schermer T, Gindner L, Laux G, Szecsenyi J, Meyer FJ

Respiratory research, 2009

160 participants

Abstract

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the sensitivity, specificity and predictive values of fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FENO) for the diagnosis of asthma in general practice.

METHODS: Prospective diagnostic study with 160 patients attending 10 general practices for the first time with complaints suspicious of obstructive airway disease (OAD). Patients were referred to a lung function laboratory for diagnostic investigation. The index test was FENO measured with a portable FENO analyser based on electrochemical sensor. The reference standard was the Tiffeneau ratio (FEV1/VC) as received by spirometric manoeuvre and/or results of bronchial provocation. Bronchial provocation with methacholine was performed to determine bronchial hyper-responsiveness (BHR) in the event of inconclusive spirometric results.

RESULTS: 88 (55%) were female; their average age was 43.9 years. 75 (46.9%) patients had asthma, 25 (15.6%) had COPD, 8 (5.0%) had an overlap of COPD and asthma, and 52 (32.5%) had no OAD. At a cut-off level of 46 parts per billion (ppb) (n = 30; 18.8%), sensitivity was 32% (95%CI 23-43%), specificity 93% (95%CI 85-97%), positive predictive value (PPV) 80% (95%CI 63-91%), negative predictive value (NPV) 61% (95%CI 52-69%) when compared with a 20% fall in FEV1 from the baseline value (PC20) after inhaling methacholine concentration <or= 16 mg/ml. At 76 ppb (n = 11; 6.9%) specificity was 100% (95%CI 96-100%) and PPV was 100% (95%CI 72-100). At a cut-off level of 16 ppb (n = 68; 42.5%),…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 160 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free