Reliability of voluntary cough assessments using respiratory flow waveform.
Yukako Setaka, Toshifumi Takao, Kenta Kawamura and 4 others
PMID 32753786WHAT IT FOUND
Different raters measured healthy adults' cough flow waveforms consistently.
The same rater's repeat readings were less consistent, especially the inspiratory peak flow. The second cough was weaker than the first.
Key findings
01Different raters agreed strongly on all measured cough waveform parameters.
02The same rater's repeat readings were less consistent, especially for inspiratory peak flow and second cough peak flow.
03In consecutive coughs, the first cough peak flow and first cough volume acceleration were greater than the second cough.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The study tested only 20 healthy adults, so it does not show how reliable the waveform is in patients with weak or impaired cough. All participants had normal pulmonary function. The authors did not assess validity, so the parameters were not shown to detect disease or guide treatment. Some repeat measurements by the same rater had lower ICC values, especially inspiratory peak flow and second cough peak flow. The equipment was large and hard to transfer. Participants may not have had enough practice to perform the voluntary consecutive cough task reliably. The authors state that the second cough resembles an involuntary cough and is hard to evaluate.
Declared interests
The authors declared no conflicts of interest.
The easy way to misread this
Do not conclude that this cough waveform assessment is clinically validated for patients. It was tested only in 20 healthy adults, and the authors did not show that the parameters are valid for detecting disease or guiding treatment.