This article requires a subscription to view the full text. If you have a subscription you may use the login form below to view the article. Access to this article can also be purchased.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pulmonary function tests (PFTs) have historically used race-specific prediction equations. The recent American Thoracic Society guidelines recommend the use of a race-neutral approach in prediction equations. There are limited studies centering the opinions of practicing pulmonologists on the use of race in spirometry. Provider opinion will impact adoption of the new guideline. The aim of this study was to ascertain the beliefs of academic pulmonary and critical care providers regarding the use of race as a variable in spirometry prediction equations.
METHODS: We report data from 151 open-ended responses from a voluntary, nationwide survey (distributed by the Association of Pulmonary Critical Care Medicine Program Directors) of academic pulmonary and critical care providers regarding the use of race in PFT prediction equations. Responses were coded using inductive and deductive methods, and a thematic content analysis was conducted.
RESULTS: There was a balanced distribution of opinions among respondents supporting, opposing, or being unsure about the incorporation of race in spirometry prediction equations. Responses demonstrated a wide array of understanding related to the concept and definition of race and its relationship to physiology.
CONCLUSIONS: There was no consensus among providers regarding the use of race in spirometry prediction equations. Concepts of race having biologic implications persist among pulmonary providers and will likely affect the uptake of the Global Lung Function Initiative per the American Thoracic Society guidelines.
Footnotes
- Correspondence: Debasree Banerjee MD MSc, Division of Pulmonary, Critical Care and Sleep Medicine, Rhode Island Hospital, 593 Eddy Street, POB Suite 224, Providence, RI 02903. E-mail: debasree_banerjee{at}brown.edu
The authors have disclosed no conflicts of interest.
This study was made possible by the Association of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine Program Directors. The project described was supported by Institutional Development Award Number U54GM115677 from the National Institute of General Medical Sciences of the National Institutes of Health, which funds Advance Clinical and Translational Research (Advance RI-CTR). Dr Rosen and Mr Lantini are partially supported by Institutional Development Award Number U54GM115677 from the National Institute of General Medical Sciences of the National Institutes of Health, which funds Advance Clinical and Translational Research (Advance RI-CTR). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.
See the Related Editorial on Page 1480
- Copyright © 2024 by Daedalus Enterprises
Pay Per Article - You may access this article (from the computer you are currently using) for 1 day for US$30.00
Regain Access - You can regain access to a recent Pay per Article purchase if your access period has not yet expired.