Přehled o publikaci
2025
The association between spirometry measurement quality, cognitive function, and mortality
QUISPE HARO, Consuelo; Tatyana Vladimirovna SARYCHEVA ÉP. COURT; Magdalena KOZELA; Abdonas TAMOSIUNAS; Nadezda CAPKOVA et. al.Základní údaje
Originální název
The association between spirometry measurement quality, cognitive function, and mortality
Autoři
QUISPE HARO, Consuelo; Tatyana Vladimirovna SARYCHEVA ÉP. COURT; Magdalena KOZELA; Abdonas TAMOSIUNAS; Nadezda CAPKOVA; Hynek PIKHART a Martin BOBÁK
Vydání
ARCHIVES OF PUBLIC HEALTH, ENGLAND, BMC, 2025, 0778-7367
Další údaje
Jazyk
angličtina
Typ výsledku
Článek v odborném periodiku
Stát vydavatele
Velká Británie a Severní Irsko
Utajení
není předmětem státního či obchodního tajemství
Odkazy
Organizace
Přírodovědecká fakulta – Masarykova univerzita – Repozitář
UT WoS
001520851000002
EID Scopus
2-s2.0-105010005072
Klíčová slova anglicky
Population studies; cohort; spirometry; cognitive function; mortality
Návaznosti
EF17_043/0009632, projekt VaV. EH23_025/0008743, projekt VaV. LM2023069, projekt VaV. LX22NPO5101, projekt VaV. 857487, interní kód Repo. 857560, interní kód Repo.
Změněno: 29. 8. 2025 00:50, RNDr. Daniel Jakubík
Anotace
V originále
Background: Population studies that assess lung function usually exclude results of individuals with poor-quality measurements, which often means excluding many subjects. Impaired cognition is frequently associated with poor-quality spirometry; excluding such subjects may introduce a selection bias in studies with lung function as either outcome or exposure. We investigated the association between poor-quality spirometry and impaired cognitive function and whether poor-quality spirometry is associated with future mortality risk independently of cognitive function. Methods: We used data from a prospective cohort in three Central and Eastern European countries; 12,087 individuals aged 45–75 years (54% females) with complete information on variables of interest were included. Standard memory, verbal fluency, and executive cognitive domain tests were converted into latent variable z-scores and divided into quartiles. Spirometry tests were classified into two categories based on repeatability criteria: good- (71%) vs. poor-quality spirometry (29% of participants). Those with good-quality spirometry were further classified, using forced vital capacity (FVC) and forced expiratory volume in the first second (FEV1), as healthy spirometry (63%) or impaired spirometry (8%). Multinomial logistic regression was used to assess the association between poor-quality spirometry and cognitive function, and a Cox proportional regression was used to analyze the risk of total mortality over a 17-year follow-up. Results: After controlling for a range of covariates, higher cognitive function predicted lower odds of poor-quality spirometry. In the highest cognitive function quartile, compared with the lowest quartile, the odds ratio of poor-quality spirometry was 0.82 (95%CI: 0.72–0.92). Impaired spirometry was associated with higher mortality risk even after adjusting for cognition (adjusted hazard ratio 1.63, 95%CI: 1.45–1.84), but mortality risk was similar in subjects with poor- vs. good-quality (HR 1.02, 95%CI: 0.93–1.10). Conclusion: Higher cognitive function was associated with a lower risk of poor-quality spirometry. The lack of independent association of poor-quality spirometry with mortality suggests that excluding poor-quality spirometry measurements from analyses is unlikely to introduce a major bias. However, discarding poor-quality spirometry from epidemiological analyses might imply the exclusion of vulnerable subjects. These findings should be confirmed in future studies representing other populations.