The aim of this study was to provide a rationale for future validations of a priori calibrated respiratory inductance plethysmography (RIP) when used under exercise conditions. Therefore, the validity of a posteriori–adjusted gain factors and accuracy in resultant breath-by-breath RIP data recorded under resting and running conditions were examined.Methods
Healthy subjects, 98 men and 88 women (mean ± SD: height = 175.6 ± 8.9 cm, weight = 68.9 ± 11.1 kg, age = 27.1 ± 8.3 yr), underwent a standardized test protocol, including a period of standing still, an incremental running test on treadmill, and multiple periods of recovery. Least square regression was used to calculate gain factors, respectively, for complete individual data sets as well as several data subsets. In comparison with flowmeter data, the validity of RIP in breathing rate (fR) and inspiratory tidal volume (VTIN) were examined using coefficients of determination (R2). Accuracy was estimated from equivalence statistics.Results
Calculated gains between different data subsets showed no equivalence. After gain adjustment for the complete individual data set, fR and VTIN between methods were highly correlated (R2 = 0.96 ± 0.04 and 0.91 ± 0.05, respectively) in all subjects. Under conditions of standing still, treadmill running, and recovery, 86%, 98%, and 94% (fR) and 78%, 97%, and 88% (VTIN), respectively, of all breaths were accurately measured within ±20% limits of equivalence.Conclusion
In case of the best possible gain adjustment, RIP confidentially estimates tidal volume accurately within ±20% under exercise conditions. Our results can be used as a rationale for future validations of a priori calibration procedures.