A Normal Forced Vital Capacity Does Not Reliably or Equitably Exclude Restriction
Listed in
This article is not in any list yet, why not save it to one of your lists.Abstract
Background
European Respiratory Society and American Thoracic Society (ERS/ATS) guidelines for pulmonary function test (PFT) interpretation recommend the use of a normal forced vital capacity (FVC) to exclude restriction. However, this recommendation is based upon a single study from 1999, which was limited to White patients, and used race-specific reference equations that are no longer recommended by ERS/ATS. We sought to reassess the support for this recommendation by calculating the negative predictive value (NPV) of a normal FVC in a diverse, multicenter cohort using race-neutral reference equations.
Methods
We interpreted PFTs performed between 2000 and 2023 in two academic medical systems and in a national electronic health record (EHR) database. We calculated the NPV of a normal FVC to exclude restriction overall and among pre-specified racial and ethnic groups.
Results
We included PFTs from 85 990 patients. The prevalence of restriction was 35.1%. The overall NPV of a normal FVC to exclude restriction was 80.5% (95% CI 80.1% to 80.8%), compared to an NPV of 97.6% cited in support of ERS/ATS guidelines. The NPV ranged from 65.2% (95% CI 64.4% to 66.0%) among non-Hispanic Black patients to 85.9% (95% CI 85.6% to 86.3%) among non-Hispanic White patients. This difference was largely attributable to lower FVC z-scores among non-Hispanic Black patients.
Conclusions
The NPV of a normal FVC is lower than has been previously reported and varies by race and ethnicity. The approach to PFT interpretation recommended by ERS/ATS guidelines results in the under-recognition of restriction, particularly among non-Hispanic Black patients.
