Chest ACCP Education Calendar
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Guest Access | Sign In via User Name/Password
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Free
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Article Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Cockcroft, D.
Right arrow Articles by Berscheid, B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Cockcroft, D.
Right arrow Articles by Berscheid, B.

Chest, Vol 82, 572-575, Copyright © 1982 by American College of Chest Physicians

ARTICLES

Standardization of inhalation provocation tests. Dose vs concentration of histamine

DW Cockcroft and BA Berscheid

The importance of histamine dose vs histamine concentration in determining the response to inhaled histamine was evaluated by comparing the effect of 30 sec and two min inhalation times on duplicate histamine inhalation tests in 15 asthmatic patients. The histamine provocation concentration required to produce a 20 percent FEV1 fall after 30 sec inhalations (30 sec PC20) was on average 3.6- fold greater than the two min PC20. Individually, ten of the 15 fell within the range of dose reproducibility (+/- one doubling dose), while five subjects fell outside this range, three with 30 sec PC20 less than twice two min PC20 and two with 30 sec PC20 greater than 8 X two min PC20. Seven subjects had duplicate measurements of both 30 sec PC20 and two min PC20; the two min PC20 was more reproducible than the 30 sec PC20 in all seven. The better reproducibility of the two min PC20 is likely due to a more reproducible inspiratory time over the two-minute breathing period. These findings have relevance in standardization of inhalation challenge tests, and in comparing results of such tests done by different techniques.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 ThoraxHome page
J M Vonk, D S Postma, H M Boezen, M H Grol, J P Schouten, G H Koeter, and J Gerritsen
Childhood factors associated with asthma remission after 30 year follow up
Thorax, November 1, 2004; 59(11): 925 - 929.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 ChestHome page
C. Wubbel, M. J. Asmus, G. Stevens, S. E. Chesrown, and L. Hendeles
Methacholine Challenge Testing*: Comparison of the Two American Thoracic Society-Recommended Methods
Chest, February 1, 2004; 125(2): 453 - 458.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 ChestHome page
D. W. Cockcroft, B. E. Davis, and A. J. Smycniuk
Development of a Methacholine Challenge Method to Minimize Methacholine Waste
Chest, October 1, 2003; 124(4): 1522 - 1525.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med.Home page
Corrigenda for vol. 155, p. 1267
Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med., July 1, 1997; 156(2): 674 - 678.
[Full Text]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1982 by the American College of Chest Physicians.