Accuracy and sensitivity of the interrupter technique for measuring the response to bronchial challenge in normal subjects

The interrupter technique is a non-invasive method for measuring airway calibre. Since the calculation of interrupter resistance (Rint) is critically dependent upon the analysis of the mouth pressure/time (Pmo(t)) curve obtained after flow interruption, we wanted to assess the relative merits of four different analyses of Pmo(t) curves, obtained under basal conditions and following methacholine-induced airway narrowing, in 10 healthy adults. Four methods of analysing the Pmo(t) curves were used to calculate Rint values: RintC-a smooth curve fit with back-extrapolation; RintL-two-point linear fit with back-extrapolation; RintEO-calculated from the pressure change after the post-interruption oscillations had decayed (end-oscillation); and RintEI-calculated from the pressure change at the end of the period of interruption. The airway response measured with the four Rint methods was compared with plethysmographic airway resistance (Raw). The sensitivity of the methods was determined by calculating a sensitivity index (SI), the change in resistance after challenge expressed in multiples of baseline standard deviation. Values of RintC were similar to Raw values under all conditions. Resistance values from the remaining Rint methods significantly exceeded Raw (mean basal difference: 0.13-0.34 kPa.l-1 x s; mean difference after challenge: 0.12-0.42 kPa.l-1 x s. Raw was the most sensitive method for detecting bronchoconstriction (doubling of Raw was equivalent to SI of 10.5). Of the Rint methods, RintEI gave the highest sensitivity index (SI = 3.1), with a 42% mean change; RintC produced the greatest proportionate change after challenge (55%), but with a lower SI (2.2).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

This article has been cited by other articles:

				S. Blonshine and M. D. Goldman Optimizing Performance of Respiratory Airflow Resistance Measurements Chest, December 1, 2008; 134(6): 1304 - 1309. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				N. Beydon, S. D. Davis, E. Lombardi, J. L. Allen, H. G. M. Arets, P. Aurora, H. Bisgaard, G. M. Davis, F. M. Ducharme, H. Eigen, et al. An Official American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society Statement: Pulmonary Function Testing in Preschool Children Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med., June 15, 2007; 175(12): 1304 - 1345. [Full Text] [PDF]

				P D Sly and E Lombardi Measurement of lung function in preschool children using the interrupter technique Thorax, September 1, 2003; 58(9): 742 - 744. [Full Text] [PDF]

				R M J Beelen, H A Smit, R T van Strien, L P Koopman, J E Brussee, B Brunekreef, J Gerritsen, and P J F M Merkus Short and long term variability of the interrupter technique under field and standardised conditions in 3-6 year old children Thorax, September 1, 2003; 58(9): 761 - 764. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				G. A. Fontana, T. Pantaleo, F. Lavorini, F. Bongianni, M. Mannelli, P. D. Bridge, and M. Pistolesi Handgrip-induced airway dilation in asthmatic patients with bronchoconstriction induced by MCh inhalation J Appl Physiol, November 1, 2002; 93(5): 1723 - 1730. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P.J.F.M. Merkus, H.G.M. Arets, T. Joosten, A. Siero, M. Brouha, J.Y. Mijnsbergen, J.C. de Jongste, and C.K. van der Ent Measurements of interrupter resistance: reference values for children 3-13 yrs of age Eur. Respir. J., October 1, 2002; 20(4): 907 - 911. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				N. Beydon, F. Amsallem, M. Bellet, M. Boule, M. Chaussain, A. Denjean, R. Matran, B. Wuyam, C. Alberti, and C. Gaultier Pre/Postbronchodilator Interrupter Resistance Values in Healthy Young Children Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med., May 15, 2002; 165(10): 1388 - 1394. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				G.L. Hall, J.H. Wildhaber, M. Cernelc, and U. Frey Evaluation of the interrupter technique in healthy, unsedated infants Eur. Respir. J., December 1, 2001; 18(6): 982 - 988. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. DELACOURT, H. LORINO, C. FUHRMAN, M. HERVE-GUILLOT, P. REINERT, A. HARF, and B. HOUSSET Comparison of the Forced Oscillation Technique and the Interrupter Technique for Assessing Airway Obstruction and Its Reversibility in Children Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med., September 15, 2001; 164(6): 965 - 972. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				E Lombardi, P D Sly, G Concutelli, E Novembre, G Veneruso, G Frongia, R Bernardini, and A Vierucci Reference values of interrupter respiratory resistance in healthy preschool white children Thorax, September 1, 2001; 56(9): 691 - 695. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R.J. Chavasse, Y. Bastian-Lee, and P. Seddon Comparison of resistance measured by the interrupter technique and by passive mechanics in sedated infants Eur. Respir. J., August 1, 2001; 18(2): 330 - 334. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				F. Child, S. Clayton, S. Davies, A.A. Fryer, P.W. Jones, and W. Lenney How should airways resistance be measured in young children: mask or mouthpiece? Eur. Respir. J., June 1, 2001; 17(6): 1244 - 1249. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P. J. F. M. MERKUS, J. Y. MIJNSBERGEN, W. C. J. HOP, and J. C. de JONGSTE Interrupter Resistance in Preschool Children . Measurement Characteristics and Reference Values Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med., May 1, 2001; 163(6): 1350 - 1355. [Abstract] [Full Text]

				V. Kessler, G. Mols, H. Bernhard, C. Haberthur, and J. Guttmann Interrupter airway and tissue resistance: errors caused by valve properties and respiratory system compliance J Appl Physiol, October 1, 1999; 87(4): 1546 - 1554. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]