Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • ONLINE FIRST
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • RESOURCES
    • About BJGP
    • Conference
    • Advertising
    • BJGP Blog
    • eLetters
    • Feedback
    • Librarian information
    • Alerts
    • Resilience
    • Video
  • RCGP
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • BJGP Open
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers
    • RCGP e-Portfolio

User menu

  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in
  • Log out

Search

  • Advanced search
British Journal of General Practice
  • RCGP
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • BJGP Open
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers
    • RCGP e-Portfolio
  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in
  • Follow bjgp on Twitter
  • Visit bjgp on Facebook
  • Blog
Advertisement
British Journal of General Practice

Advanced Search

  • HOME
  • ONLINE FIRST
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • RESOURCES
    • About BJGP
    • Conference
    • Advertising
    • BJGP Blog
    • eLetters
    • Feedback
    • Librarian information
    • Alerts
    • Resilience
    • Video
Research Article

Testing bronchial hyper-responsiveness: provocation or peak expiratory flow variability?

J J den Otter, G M Reijnen, W J van den Bosch, C P van Schayck, J Molema and C van Weel
British Journal of General Practice 1997; 47 (421): 487-492.
J J den Otter
Department of General Practice and Social Medicine, Nijmegen University, The Netherlands.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
G M Reijnen
Department of General Practice and Social Medicine, Nijmegen University, The Netherlands.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
W J van den Bosch
Department of General Practice and Social Medicine, Nijmegen University, The Netherlands.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
C P van Schayck
Department of General Practice and Social Medicine, Nijmegen University, The Netherlands.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
J Molema
Department of General Practice and Social Medicine, Nijmegen University, The Netherlands.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
C van Weel
Department of General Practice and Social Medicine, Nijmegen University, The Netherlands.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Assessing bronchial hyper-responsiveness (BHR) is a main diagnostic criterion of asthma. Provocation testing is not readily available in general practice, but peak expiratory flow (PEF) is. Several guidelines promote the use of PEF variability as a diagnostic tool for BHR. This study tested the agreement between histamine challenge testing and PEF variability, and the consequences for diagnosing asthma. AIM: To investigate the possibility of assessing BHR by PEF variability, using a histamine provocation test as a reference. METHOD: Subjects with signs of symptoms indicating asthma (persistent or recurrent respiratory symptoms or signs of reversible bronchial obstruction) (n = 323) were studied. They had been identified in a population screening for asthma. A histamine provocation test and PEF variability were assessed over a three-week period. Asthma was defined as signs or symptoms together with a reversible airflow obstruction or BHR to the histamine challenge test. BHR was defined as a PC20 histamine of < or = 8 mg/ml or a PEF variability of > or = 15%. Overall correlation between PC20 and PEF variability was calculated using Spearman's rho. Furthermore, a decision tree was constructed to clarify the role of BHR in diagnosing asthma. RESULTS: Thirty-two patients had a reversibility in forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) of > or = 9% predicted, 131 patients showed a PC20 of < or = 8 and 11 patients had a PEF variability of > or = 15%. Overall correlation was poor at only -0.27 (P < 0.0001). One hundred and fourteen of the 131 patients diagnosed as having asthma when the histamine challenge test was used were not diagnosed by PEF variability. CONCLUSION: PEF variability cannot replace bronchial provocation testing in assessing BHR. This indicates that PEF variability and bronchial provocation do not measure the same aspects of BHR. If BHR testing is required in diagnosing asthma, a bronchial provocation test has to be used in general practice as well.

Back to top
Previous ArticleNext Article

In this issue

British Journal of General Practice: 47 (421)
British Journal of General Practice
Vol. 47, Issue 421
August 1997
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Or,
sign in or create an account with your email address
Email Article

Thank you for recommending British Journal of General Practice.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person to whom you are recommending the page knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Testing bronchial hyper-responsiveness: provocation or peak expiratory flow variability?
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from British Journal of General Practice
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from British Journal of General Practice.
Citation Tools
Testing bronchial hyper-responsiveness: provocation or peak expiratory flow variability?
J J den Otter, G M Reijnen, W J van den Bosch, C P van Schayck, J Molema, C van Weel
British Journal of General Practice 1997; 47 (421): 487-492.

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Share
Testing bronchial hyper-responsiveness: provocation or peak expiratory flow variability?
J J den Otter, G M Reijnen, W J van den Bosch, C P van Schayck, J Molema, C van Weel
British Journal of General Practice 1997; 47 (421): 487-492.
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
  • Mendeley logo Mendeley

Jump to section

  • Top
  • Article
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF

More in this TOC Section

  • Improving the ascertainment of families at high risk of colorectal cancer: a prospective GP register study.
  • Exploratory cluster randomised controlled trial of shared care development for long-term mental illness.
  • Integrated primary mental health care: threat or opportunity in the new NHS?
Show more Research Article

Related Articles

Cited By...

Advertisement

 

Register Now for the BJGP Research Conference, 12 March 2020

BJGP Open

 

@BJGPjournal's Likes on Twitter

 
 

British Journal of General Practice

NAVIGATE

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • All Issues
  • Online First
  • Authors & reviewers

RCGP

  • BJGP for RCGP members
  • BJGP Open
  • RCGP eLearning
  • InnovAiT Journal
  • Jobs and careers
  • RCGP e-Portfolio

MY ACCOUNT

  • RCGP members' login
  • Subscriber login
  • Activate subscription
  • Terms and conditions

NEWS AND UPDATES

  • About BJGP
  • Alerts
  • RSS feeds
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

AUTHORS & REVIEWERS

  • Submit an article
  • Writing for BJGP: research
  • Writing for BJGP: other sections
  • BJGP editorial process & policies
  • BJGP ethical guidelines
  • Peer review for BJGP

CUSTOMER SERVICES

  • Advertising
  • Contact subscription agent
  • Copyright
  • Librarian information

CONTRIBUTE

  • BJGP Blog
  • eLetters
  • Feedback

CONTACT US

BJGP Journal Office
RCGP
30 Euston Square
London NW1 2FB
Tel: +44 (0)20 3188 7679
Email: journal@rcgp.org.uk

British Journal of General Practice is an editorially-independent publication of the Royal College of General Practitioners
© 2019 British Journal of General Practice

Print ISSN: 0960-1643
Online ISSN: 1478-5242