Comparative repeatability of two handheld fractional exhaled nitric oxide monitors.

K.M. Kapande, L.A. McConaghy, I. Douglas, S. McKenna, J.L. Hughes, D.R. McCance, Madeleine Ennis, Michael Shields

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

31 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background The use of portable fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FENO) devices is increasingly common in the diagnosis and management of allergic airways inflammation. Methods We tested two handheld FENO devices, to determine (a) if there was adequate intradevice repeatability to allow the use of single breath testing, and (b) if the devices could be used interchangeably. In a mixed pediatric population, including normal, asthmatic, and children with peanut allergies, 858 paired values were collected from the NIOX-MINO® and/or the NObreath® devices. Results The NIOX-MINO® showed excellent repeatability (mean difference of 0.1 with 95% limits of agreement between -7.93 to 7.72?ppb), while the NObreath® showed good repeatability (mean difference of -1.61 with 95% limits of agreement between -14.1 and 10.8?ppb). Intradevice repeatability was good but not adequate and the NIOX-MINO® systematically produced higher results than the NObreath® [mean difference of 7.8?ppb with 95% limits of agreement from -11.55 to 27.52?ppb (-33% to 290%)]. Conclusions Our results support the manufacturer's advice that single breath testing is appropriate for the NIOX-MINO®. NObreath® results indicate that the mean of more than one breath should be utilized. The devices cannot be used interchangeably. Pediatr Pulmonol. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)546-550
Number of pages5
JournalPediatric Pulmonology
Volumeepub
Issue number6
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Oct 2011

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pediatrics, Perinatology, and Child Health
  • Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Comparative repeatability of two handheld fractional exhaled nitric oxide monitors.'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this