Expert judgment of peak flow-time graphs provides an important tool to detect occupational asthma.
This technique has mainly been used in clinics to evaluate reversible airflow obstruction and to assess potential work-related patterns.
The reproducibility of this technique in an open working population is unknown.
Agreement between and within nine experts was studied using peak flow-time graphs of 49 potato-processing workers.
All graphs were classified into four categories by the nine experts, while seven experts read ten graphs at two occasions.
Thirty-four graphs (69%) were classified as « no airway obstruction » while four graphs (8%) showed « work-related airway obstruction. » There was only slight agreement between the nine experts ; mean Cohen's kappa (K) was 0.19.
Agreement within experts was moderate ; mean K was 0.47 for judging graphs twice.
Our results suggest that in a « healthy » working population, judgment of peak flow graphs is not a favorable method for detection of airway obstruction.
If this technique is applied in epidemiological studies, judgment of the graphs should be done by more than one expert.
Mots-clés Pascal : Médecine travail, Maladie professionnelle, Diagnostic, Asthme, VEMS, Evaluation, Expert, Médecin, Validation test, Biais méthodologique, Interprétation test, Homme, Industrie alimentaire, Surveillance, Appareil respiratoire pathologie, Bronchopneumopathie obstructive, Débit expiratoire maximum
Mots-clés Pascal anglais : Occupational medicine, Occupational disease, Diagnosis, Asthma, Maximal expiratory volume per second, Evaluation, Expert, Physician, Test validation, Methodological bias, Test interpretation, Human, Food industry, Surveillance, Respiratory disease, Obstructive pulmonary disease, Maximum expiratory flow rate
Notice produite par :
Inist-CNRS - Institut de l'Information Scientifique et Technique
Cote : 99-0041889
Code Inist : 002B24H. Création : 31/05/1999.