Table 2 Mean PEF recorded using both techniques on three devices.
From: Effects of equipment and technique on peak flow measurements
Technique | Mean PEF (l/min) (SD) | PEF as % predicted | Variance from Wright's PEF And t-test for difference |
|---|---|---|---|
Wright Meter PEF technique | 308 (137) | 75% predicted | Not applicable |
Wright Meter FVC technique | 284 (131) | 69% predicted | 7.8% lower p < 0.0002 |
Turbine Spirometer PEF technique | 291 (138) | 71% predicted | 5.5% lower p < 0.0002 |
Turbine Spirometer FVC technique | 258 (128) | 63% predicted | 16.2% lower p < 0.0001 |
Fleisch Spirometer PEF technique | 248 (118) | 60% predicted | 19.5% lower p < 0.0001 |
Fleisch Spirometer FVC technique | 234 (113) | 57% predicted | 24.0% lower p < 0.0001 |
Wright Meter PEF converted to new EU PEF scale | 266 (130) | 65% predicted | 13.6% lower |