Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Stenton, S. C.
Right arrow Articles by Hendrick, D. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Stenton, S. C.
Right arrow Articles by Hendrick, D. J.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Occupational Medicine 1993;43:203-206
© 1993 Society of Occupational Medicine

research-article

The value of questionnaires and spirometry in asthma surveillance programmes in the workplace

S. C. Stenton, J. R. Beach*, A. J. Avery and D. J. Hendrick

Chest Unit and Regional Unit for Occupational Lung Disease, Newcastle General Hospital, University of Newcastle upon Tyne UK

Shipyard workers and job applicants (n=1126) completed an asthma questionnaire, and underwent measurements of ventilatory lung function (FEV1, FEV1/FVC and PEER) and airway responsiveness. Airway responsiveness (to inhaled methacholine) was expressed as the dose calculated to provoke a 20 per cent fall in FEV1, ie the PD20. Results were categorized into four levels: high (PD20<200µg), medium (200–1000µg), low (1001–6400µg) and unquantifiable (>6400µg), which correspond with definite, possible, doubtful and no asthmatic activity. These categories agreed closely with diagnoses of asthma by general practitioners and the use of bronchodilator medication. The sensitivity and specificity of the questionnaire and the measurements of ventilatory function for detecting asthmatic activity were then determined. The questionnaire symptoms (wheeze, chest tightness, undue coughing or abnormal breathlessness) had a low (28 per cent) sensitivity for detecting definite or possible asthmatic activity and a specificity of only 73 per cent. The sensitivity of the ventilatory function tests (any one abnormal) was also low at 21 per cent with a specificity of 92 per cent. When the FEV1 <80 per cent predicted criterion was considered separately, its sensitivity was 11 per cent and its specificity was 98 per cent. These results illustrate that caution is needed when interpreting the results of questionnaires and measurements of ventilatory lung function in the diagnosis of asthma among working populations.

Correspondence to: S. C. Stenton, Chest Unit and Regional Unit for Occupational Lung Disease, Newcastle General Hospital, University of Newcastle upon Tyne, Newcastle upon Tyne NE4 6BE, UK


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Occup. Environ. Med.Home page
P J Nicholson, P Cullinan, A J Newman Taylor, P S Burge, and C Boyle
Evidence based guidelines for the prevention, identification, and management of occupational asthma
Occup. Environ. Med., May 1, 2005; 62(5): 290 - 299.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Arch Intern MedHome page
M. M. Wilson and R. S. Irwin
The Association of Asthma and Obesity: Is It Real or a Matter of Definition, Presbyterian Ministers' Salaries, and Earlobe Creases?
Arch Intern Med, November 22, 1999; 159(21): 2513 - 2514.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med.Home page
S. B. GORDON, A. D. CURRAN, A. TURLEY, C.-H. WONG, S. N. RAHMAN, K. WILEY, and A. H. MORICE
Glass Bottle Workers Exposed to Low-Dose Irritant Fumes Cough but Do Not Wheeze
Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med., July 1, 1997; 156(1): 206 - 210.
[Abstract] [Full Text]


Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.