Document resource
Introduction The VitaloPFT is a line of pulmonary function testing (PFT) equipment, featuring the laboratory-based VitaloLAB model and the portable VitaloROV+ model. The current study evaluated the inter- and intra-session performance of the VitaloLAB and VitaloROV+ PFT systems, by measuring variability in test results for diffusing capacity of the lungs for carbon monoxide (DLco).Methods Eight healthy male and female volunteers were invited to participate in the study. Included subjects provided DLco readings, collected using two different VitaloLAB devices and two different VitaloROV+ devices. All tests were overseen by a single operator, with test sessions conducted in the morning or at lunchtime over a period of 8 days. Daily calibration was performed for all four devices, along with biological and mechanical quality control testing. Variability across repeated measurements was assessed using the coefficient of variation (CoV), with a target CoV of □3.1% based on prior research (Punjabi et al. Chest 2003; 123: 1082–9).Results Complete data were available for five test subjects, who each provided 16 separate DLco readings, totalling 80 individual data points. Data for inter- and intra-session variability for the VitaloLAB and VitaloROV+ PFT systems are shown in table 1. The majority of CoV values were □3.1%, with all remaining values exceeding this target by 0.11–2.17%. DLco values of <0.5 mL/min/mmHg were recorded during quality control testing using a 3L syringe, consistent with ERS/ATS performance standards. Results of simulation testing verified that DLco measurements obtained using the VitaloROV+ and VitaloLAB systems were accurate per the manufacturer’s specifications.Abstract P71 Table 1Intra- and inter-session variability in DLco measurements obtained using VitaloPFT pulmonary function testing equipment (test subjects, n=5; biological QC, n=1)Conclusions Inter- and intra-session testing indicate that the VitaloPFT series — comprising the VitaloROV+ and VitaloLAB systems — provide consistent and comparable results over successive manoeuvres, reducing the need for multiple tests where devices are located in different departments or institutions. The authors recommend that inter- and intra-device testing be performed by all device manufacturers to provide users with confidence in their patients’ results. Additional analyses in a larger population of test subjects over a longer time period are warranted.