Search

Background: Exhaled breath analysis is an emerging technology in respiratory disease and infection. Electronic nose devices (e-nose) are small and portable with a potential for point of care application. Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is a common nosocomial infection occurring in the intensive care unit (ICU). The current best diagnostic approach is based on clinical criteria combined with bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) and subsequent bacterial culture analysis. BAL is invasive, laborious and time consuming. Exhaled breath analysis by e-nose is non-invasive, easy to perform and could reduce diagnostic time. Aim of this study was to explore whether an e-nose can be used as a non-invasive in vivo diagnostic tool for VAP., Methods: Seventy-two patients met the clinical diagnostic criteria of VAP and underwent BAL. In thirty-three patients BAL analysis confirmed the diagnosis of VAP [BAL+(VAP+)], in thirty-nine patients the diagnosis was rejected [BAL-]. Before BAL was performed, exhaled breath was sampled from the expiratory limb of the ventilator into sterile Tedlar bags and subsequently analysed by an e-nose with metal oxide sensors (DiagNose, C-it, Zutphen, The Netherlands). From further fifty-three patients without clinical suspicion of VAP or signs of respiratory disease exhaled breath was collected to serve as a control group [control(VAP-]). The e-nose data from exhaled breath were analysed using logistic regression., Results: The ROC curve comparing [BAL+(VAP+)] and [control(VAP-)] patients had an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.82 (95% CI 0.73-0.9). The sensitivity was 88% with a specificity of 66%. The comparison of [BAL+(VAP+)] and [BAL-] patients revealed an AUC of 0.69; 95% CI 0.57-0.81) with a sensitivity of 76% with a specificity of 56%., Conclusion: E-nose lacked sensitivity and specificity in the diagnosis of VAP in the present study for current clinical application. Further investigation into this field is warranted to explore the diagnostic possibilities of this promising new technique., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Airway bacterial colonization by potentially pathogenic microorganisms occurs in a proportion of patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD). It increases airway inflammation and influences outcomes negatively. Yet, its diagnosis in clinical practice is not straightforward. The electronic nose is a new non-invasive technology capable of distinguishing volatile organic compound (VOC) breath-prints in exhaled breath. We aim to explore if an electronic nose can reliably discriminate COPD patients with and without airway bacterial colonization., Methods: We studied 37 clinically stable COPD patients (67.8 ± 5.2 yrs, FEV1 41 ± 10% ref.) and 13 healthy controls (62.8 ± 5.2 yrs, FEV1 99 ± 10% ref.). The presence of potentially pathogenic microorganisms in the airways of COPD patients (n = 10, 27%) was determined using quantitative bacterial cultures of protected specimen brush. VOCs breath-prints were analyzed by discriminant analysis on principal component reduction, resulting in cross-validated accuracy values. Area Under Receiver Operating Characteristics (AUROC) was calculated using multiple logistic regression., Results: Demographic, functional and clinical characteristics were similar in colonized and non-colonized COPD patients but their VOC breath-prints were different (accuracy 89%, AUROC 0.92, p > 0.0001). Likewise, VOCs breath-prints from colonized (accuracy 88%, AUROC 0.98, p < 0.0001) and non-colonized COPD patients (accuracy 83%, AUROC 0.93, p < 0.0001) were also different from controls., Conclusions: An electronic nose can identify the presence of airway bacterial colonization in clinically stable patients with COPD., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Sarcoidosis is a systemic granulomatous disease of unknown cause that affects the lungs in over 90% of cases. Breath analysis by electronic nose technology provides exhaled molecular profiles that have potential in the diagnosis of several respiratory diseases., Objectives: We hypothesized that exhaled molecular profiling may distinguish well-characterized patients with sarcoidosis from controls. To that end we performed electronic nose measurements in untreated and treated sarcoidosis patients and in healthy controls., Methods: 31 sarcoidosis patients (11 patients with untreated pulmonary sarcoidosis [age: 48.4 ± 9.0], 20 patients with treated pulmonary sarcoidosis [age: 49.7 ± 7.9]) and 25 healthy controls (age: 39.6 ± 14.1) participated in a cross-sectional study. Exhaled breath was collected twice using a Tedlar bag by a standardized method. Both bags were then sampled by an electronic nose (Cyranose C320), resulting in duplicate data. Statistical analysis on sensor responses was performed off-line by principal components (PC) analyses, discriminant analysis and ROC curves., Results: Breathprints from patients with untreated pulmonary sarcoidosis were discriminated from healthy controls (CVA: 83.3%; AUC 0.825). Repeated measurements confirmed those results. Patients with untreated and treated sarcoidosis could be less well discriminated (CVA 74.2%), whereas the treated sarcoidosis group was undistinguishable from controls (CVA 66.7%), Conclusion: Untreated patients with active sarcoidosis can be discriminated from healthy controls. This suggests that exhaled breath analysis has potential for diagnosis and/or monitoring of sarcoidosis., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Collection of exhaled breath condensate (EBC) is a non-invasive means of sampling the airway-lining fluid of the lungs. EBC contains numerous measurable mediators, whose analysis could change the management of patients with certain pulmonary diseases. While initially popularized in investigations involving spontaneously breathing patients, an increasing number of studies have been performed using EBC in association with mechanical ventilation. Collection of EBC in mechanically ventilated patients follows basic principles of condensation, but is influenced by multiple factors. Effective collection requires selection of a collection device, adequate minute ventilation, low cooling temperatures, and sampling times of greater than 10 min. Condensate can be contaminated by saliva, which needs to be filtered. Dilution of samples occurs secondary to distilled water in vapors and humidification in the ventilator circuit. Dilution factors may need to be employed when investigating non-volatile biomarkers. Storage and analysis should occur promptly at -70 °C to -80 °C to prevent rapid degradation of samples. The purpose of this review is to examine and describe methodologies and problems of EBC collection in mechanically ventilated patients. A straightforward and safe framework has been established to investigate disease processes in this population, yet technical aspects of EBC collection still exist that prevent clinical practicality of this technology. These include a lack of standardization of procedure and analysis of biomarkers, and of normal reference ranges for mediators in healthy individuals. Once these procedural aspects have been addressed, EBC could serve as a non-invasive alternative to invasive evaluation of lungs in mechanically ventilated patients., (Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The evaluation of exhaled breath profiles by electronic nose (eNose) is considered as a promising non-invasive diagnostic tool, and the discrimination of breathprints between patients with COPD and asthma has been reported. The aim of this study was to assess, whether exhaled breath profile analysis can detect the inflammatory airway response induced by ozone inhalation., Methods: In a randomized double-blind, cross-over study 14 healthy ozone-responsive subjects were exposed to 250 ppb ozone and filtered room air for 3h with intermittent exercise. Blood biomarkers, exhaled NO, exhaled CO, and breathprints (Cyranose 320(®)) were assessed prior and at 3 time points up to 24h post exposure. Induced sputum was collected at baseline and 3h post exposure. Multivariate analysis of eNose data was performed using transformed and normalized datasets., Results: Significantly increased numbers of sputum and blood neutrophils were observed after ozone, whereas the eNose signals showed no differences between exposures and no correlation with neutrophilic airway inflammation. However, independent of ozone exposure, sensor data correlated with serum SP-D levels and to a smaller extent with blood neutrophil numbers., Conclusions: Exhaled breath profiles as measured by the Cyranose 320(®) did not reflect airway responses to ozone. This suggests that exhaled volatiles did not change with ozone challenges or that the changes were below the detection limits. Conversely, the correlation of eNose signals with blood neutrophils and serum SP-D, i.e. markers of systemic inflammation and lung permeability, suggested that the Cyranose 320(®) can detect volatile organic compounds of systemic origin., (Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The NIOX MINO(®) is a nitric oxide (FE(NO)) analyser based on electrochemical technology. It includes a replaceable sensor. Quality control procedures are recommended, but regular calibration is not possible. We aimed to evaluate the performance characteristics of the NIOX MINO(®) to identify if reproducibility changed over time, or with different sensors. Also, there are reports that reproducibility of FE(NO) may be reduced in patients with high FE(NO): our secondary aim was to address this issue., Methods: Reproducibility in 24 separate sensor-analyser units was calculated on three occasions over two months in 17 patients. These included 9 patients whose FE(NO) was high (mean 80 ppb) and 8 in whom FE(NO) was low (mean 16 ppb)., Results: One device failed quality control testing. For the remaining 23 sensor-analyser combinations, the mean coefficient of variation was 4.0% (range 1.2-7.2%) at baseline, 3.6% (range 2.0-7.0) at one month, and 3.6% (range 1.6-7.6%) at two months. The 95% C.I. for the mean limits of agreement for FE(NO) was ± 4.2 ppb (range 0.9-9.6 ppb), ± 3.8 ppb (range 1.6-6.9 ppb) and ± 3.2 ppb (range 1.2-6.8 ppb) respectively (NS). The limits of agreement exceeded the manufacturer's specifications (± 5 ppb) in 0 devices at baseline, 3 (13%) at one month, and 5 (22%) at two months., Conclusions: Reproducibility of FE(NO) using the NIOX MINO(®) was within clinically acceptable limits (± 10 ppb) and was generally stable. However, with time, a proportion of individual sensor-analyser combinations yielded variability outside the manufacturer's specifications., (Copyright © 2010. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Background: Fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FENO) has been implicated as a pulmonary biomarker. The aim of this study was to compare the performance of a new hand-held device to a standard chemiluminescence analyzer and to another portable device., Methods: FENO levels measured by NObreath (Bedfont) were compared to those of (1) a chemiluminescence detector (Logan, Logan Research) and (2) the electrochemical portable NIOX MINO (Aerocrine) in 18 healthy volunteers on three consecutive occasions: in the morning, 1 h and 24 h later., Results: Comparing FENO levels obtained by NObreath to those by Logan values were similar and a very close linear relationship was found between the two devices (r = 0.923, p < 0.001). The mean inter-device difference in FENO level was -3.45 ppb and the limits of agreement (Bland-Altman test) were -10.98 and 4.08 ppb. In the second series FENO levels obtained by NObreath were found to be slightly higher compared to those of NIOX MINO, but still showed a close correlation (r = 0.681, p < 0.001). The mean inter-device difference in FENO level was 4.36 ppb and the limits of agreement were -7.38 and 16.1 ppb. Analyzing the repeated FENO measurements, the mean coefficient of variation using NObreath tended to be lower than that of NIOX MINO (16.9 vs. 24.7%, p = 0.059), while it was similar as the value obtained with Logan (11.8 vs. 9.0%, p = 0.342)., Conclusions: FENO values measured with NObreath are reproducible and in good agreement with those obtained by NIOX MINO and Logan indicating that NObreath is suitable for use in clinical practice.

Background: Exhaled nitric oxide (eNO) is an established, noninvasive biomarker of active airway inflammation in (atopic) asthma. Treatment with anti-inflammatory therapy, such as inhaled corticosteroids, effectively decreases eNO levels. The NIOX MINO (MINO) is a hand-held, relatively inexpensive, electrochemical device that has been shown to yield comparable eNO measurements to the NIOX stationary unit., Aim: To compare measurements of MINO with another widely used and validated stationary chemiluminescence analyzer, the Ecomedics (ECO)., Methods: We performed subsequent eNO measurements on ECO and MINO in 50 subjects (19 healthy volunteers, 18 healthy smokers and 13 non-smoking, atopic asthmatics, not on controller therapy) on two visits 4-10 days apart. The mean of three acceptable measurements by ECO and the first acceptable measurement with the MINO were used for analysis., Results: Both devices yielded reproducible eNO values for all subjects on both visits, with an overall CV of 22.7% (ECO) and 18.3% (MINO). A significant correlation was found between both devices (r=0.97, p<0.0001). Bland-Altman plots showed a high degree of agreement for the entire study population (mean difference MINO vs ECO=-10%; 95% limit of agreement were -36% and +28%) and in the three individual subgroups., Conclusions: Exhaled NO values measured with the MINO are reproducible and in agreement with the ECO. Our results add further evidence to the reliability of the MINO and warrant its applicability in research and clinical practice.

Background: Exhaled NO (FE(NO)) is a useful biomarker for the monitoring of asthma control and response to therapy. However, there is a lack of data on FE(NO) levels and their interpretation in Primary Care asthma population depending on their treatment and smoking habit. Besides, the majority of current FE(NO) tests have been done by stationary chemiluminescence analysers whose use is limited to research laboratories., Methods: FE(NO) measurements by the novel hand-held NO monitoring device (NIOX MINO) were made in 96 asthma patients (32 males, mean age 53+/-12) at five local General Practices during their scheduled 15-20 min visits for lung function assessment., Results: Success rate was 78% and the intra-subject coefficient of variation was 8.7%. Inhaled corticosteroid treatment had an overall reducing effect on the FE(NO) value (30.5 [19.8-49.8]) vs. patients not on the ICS (26.5 [19-94]) (p<0.044). FE(NO) levels in the ICS treated current or ex-smokers group of patients were still significantly above the normal values (p<0.0001). FE(NO) levels were similar in patients receiving ICS whether there were current, ex-smokers or non-smokers. The highest FE(NO) levels (94 [15.8-151]) were found in asthmatic current smokers and not receiving treatment with ICS. The most "normalised" FE(NO) levels (35.3 [13.5-35.3]) were seen in ex-smokers., Conclusions: FE(NO) measurements performed with a new hand-held monitoring device are reproducible and feasible in General Practice in the majority of patients of different ages and asthma severities. A high percentage of patients with different severities of asthma and regardless of their treatment with ICS and current smoking habit (current and/or ex-smokers) had highly elevated FE(NO) values, suggesting that their current therapy was possibly insufficient to control the underlying degree of airway inflammation and asthma symptoms.

Introduction: Exhaled nitric oxide (FE(NO)) is a reliable non-invasive marker of airway inflammation. In 2003 FE(NO) chemiluminescence analyzer (NIOX; Aerocrine AB, Solna, Sweden) was approved by U.S. Food and Drug Administration for monitoring asthma therapy. Recently, the same company developed a portable device using electrochemical sensors (NIOX-MINO; Aerocrine AB). The aim of our study was to compare NIOX-MINO FE(NO) values to those obtained by NIOX and to calculate a correction equation., Methods: Two adequate measurements obtained by NIOX and NIOX-MINO were recorded in 32 subjects (16 females, mean age 41 years)., Results: FE(NO) values measured by NIOX-MINO were systematically higher than those obtained by NIOX (47.1ppb, IC 95% 35.2-59.1 and 36.9ppb, IC 95% 25.0-49.0, respectively). There was a significant correlation (r=0.998, p<0.001) between FE(NO) measured by the two analyzers and the following conversion equation was calculated as: FE(NO(NIOX))=-1.656(SE=0.61)+0.808(SE=0.009)x FE(NO(NIOX-MINO)) DISCUSSION: FE(NO) values measured by the portable nitric oxide analyzer are reliable and strongly correlated with values obtained by the standard stationary device, with a systematic difference observed between the two instruments' values that can be described by the conversion equation we provided. This equation will help clinicians and researchers to compare data obtainable by the two analyzers.

Background: Exhaled breath condensate analysis is an attractive but still not fully standardised method for investigating airway pathology. Adherence of biomarkers to various condensing surfaces and changes in condensing temperature has been considered to be responsible for the variability of the results. Our aims were to compare the efficacy of different types of condensers and to test the influence of condensing temperature on condensate composition., Methods: Breath condensates from 12 healthy persons were collected in two settings: (1) by using three condensers of different type (EcoScreen, R-Tube, Anacon) and (2) by using R-Tube condenser either cooled to -20 or -70 degrees C. Condensate pH at standardised CO(2) level was determined; protein content was measured by the Bradford method and leukotrienes by EIA., Results: Breath condensates collected using EcoScreen were more alkaline (6.45+/-0.20 vs. 6.19+/-0.23, p<0.05 and 6.10+/-0.26, p<0.001) and contained more protein (3.89+/-2.03 vs. 2.65+/-1.98, n.s. and 1.88+/-1.99 microg/ml, p<0.004) as compared to the other devices. Only parameters obtained with R-Tube and Anacon correlated. Condensing temperature affected condensate pH (5.99+/-0.20 at -20 degrees C and 5.82+/-0.07 at -70 degrees C, p<0.05) but not protein content. Leukotriene B(4) was not found in any sample and cysteinyl-leukotriene was not found in condensates collected with R-Tube or Anacon., Conclusion: Condenser type influences sample pH, total protein content and cysteinyl-leukotriene concentration. Condensing temperature influences condensate pH but not total protein content. These results suggest that adherence of the biomarkers to condenser surface and condensing temperature may play a role but does not fully explain the variability of EBC biomarker levels.

Rationale: Inflammation is a universal pathological reaction and is characterized among other things by increased heat production. The question stays whether the contribution of the inflamed lung tissues to the overall exhaled breath temperature (EBT) can be reliably detected and used in everyday clinical practice., Methods: We have designed a simple device for assessment of EBT and explored its performance under standard indoor conditions. We made our measurements in the morning hours, documenting the ambient conditions (room temperature, humidity, atmospheric pressure), and physiological characteristics of the tested subjects (heart rate, blood pressure, otic and axillary temperature). We assessed its day-to-day reproducibility in 17 healthy volunteers and its ability to discriminate between the same subjects without respiratory disease and uncontrolled asthmatics (n=14). We also compared the EBT of the 14 asthmatics before and after anti-inflammatory treatment., Results: No association was found between EBT and any of the ambient conditions: room temperature, atmospheric pressure and humidity. While otic and axillary temperatures, which were measured in parallel, maintained high correlation between each other (Spearman's rho=0.71, p<0.01), EBT did not show meaningful association with any of them. The EBT (degrees C) of asthmatics (median 35.45, range 34.12-36.09) was higher than that of controls (34.84, 32.29-35.84), (p=0.009, Mann-Whitney U test). Anti-inflammatory treatment brought down the EBT of the asthmatics (34.78, 33.23-36.06), (p=0.001, Wilcoxon Signed Ranks test), while significantly improving their spirometry too., Conclusions: Measurements of EBT with the device we constructed are not significantly influenced by changes within the accepted range of a standard indoor environment. EBT represents a different characteristic of the human organism than otic and axillary temperatures. EBT is increased in uncontrolled asthmatics and decreases under anti-inflammatory treatment.

Introduction: Exhaled nitric oxide (NO) is an established technique for monitoring airway inflammation. We have compared exhaled NO measurements from 3 different analysers; Ecomedics (E), Niox (N) and Logan (L)., Methods: Thirty subjects (10 non-smoking healthy subjects, 10 non-smoking patients with asthma and 10 ex-smoking COPD patients) performed 3 repeated measurements of exhaled NO at a flow rate of 50 ml/s on each of the 3 analysers. Within analyser variability was determined by calculating the repeatability coefficient for each analyser. Differences between analysers were assessed by (1) the differences between group means and (2) the Bland Altman method to estimate the variability expected for an individual using the 3 analysers., Results: The repeatability coefficients (expressed as ratios) were 1.12, 1.19 and 1.19 for N, E and L, respectively. There were significant differences (P<0.05) between analysers; the Logan analyser gave the highest group mean values and Ecomedics gave the lowest group mean values. Differences between analysers were observed in all subject groups (healthy, asthma, COPD). Similar results were obtained in the 3 groups when analysed separately. Bland Altman analysis gave the following ratios [data are mean ratio (95% limits of agreement)]; N:E 1.59 (1.02-2.50), L:N 1.23 (0.72-2.13), L:E 1.96 (1.09-3.57)., Conclusion: Our findings indicate that exhaled NO measurements in healthy subjects and patients with airways disease differ according to the type of analyser used.

Inflammatory processes in the lung can or will elicit oxidative stress. The degree of oxidative stress can be determined by measuring hydrogen peroxide (H(2)O(2)) concentration in exhaled breath condensate (EBC) but the methods to measure H(2)O(2) are all rather time consuming and only reliable and/or accurate in the hand of skilled technicians in a dedicated laboratory. We tested a new commercial device (Ecocheck), developed to offer a less time-consuming method to measure H(2)O(2). We validated this new method according the NCCLS EP10-A2 protocol. The validation shows that the imprecision in the low range is high (28.4%) and declines with higher concentrations of H(2)O(2) (up to 6.6%). The Ecocheck is "an easy to use" measuring device for routine measurements getting quick results without the need for skilled technicians to determine H(2)O(2) concentrations.

Currently no published data are available concerning the comparability of different types of NO analysers, making inter-laboratory comparisons difficult. In two sets of experiments we compared 4 and 5 NO analysers, respectively, from 3 different manufacturers using different calibration regimes: calibration with (1) a separate recommended calibration gas for each analyser, (2) a single low concentration for all (394 ppb), and (3) a single high concentration (12.8 ppm). We measured three subjects with known low (L), moderate (M) and high (H) bronchial exhaled nitric oxide concentrations as well as standard gases (SG). In the first set of experiments, calibration regime 1 resulted in the largest differences between analysers (coefficient of variation (CV) for L, M, H, SG: 0.42, 0.22, 0.20, 0.14). The lowest CV between analysers was observed after calibration 2 (0.34, 0.19, 0.12, 0.02). Very similar results were obtained in the second set of comparisons. Thus, differences between analysers existed, but were mainly due to differences in recommended calibration gases/procedures. Only a small part was explainable by deviations from target flow. These differences need to be taken into account when comparing data between laboratories or replacing the calibration gas of an analyser, as well as for the establishment and interpretation of normal values.

We investigated the sensitivity and reproducibility of a test procedure for measuring hydrogen peroxide (H202) in exhaled breath condensate and the effect of storage of the condensate on the H2O2 concentration, and compared the results to previous studies. Twenty stable COPD patients breathed into our collecting device twice for a period of 10 min. The total exhaled air volume (EAV) and condensate volume were measured both times and the H2O2 concentration of the condensate was determined fluorimetrically. The concentration was measured again after freezing the reaction product at -70 degrees C for a period of 10, 20 and 40 days. We collected 2-5 ml condensate in 10 min. The EAV and condensate volumes were strongly correlated. There was no significant difference between the mean H2O2 concentration of the first and second test. We obtained a detect on limit for the H2O2 concentration of 0.02 micromoll(-1). The H2O2 concentration appeared to remain stable for a period up to 40 days of freezing. Compared to previous studies we developed a more efficient breath condensate collecting device and obtained a lower H2O2 detection limit. The measurement of exhaled H2O2 was reproducible. In addition, storage of the samples up to 40 days showed no changes in H2O2 concentration.

The Lion Intoximeter 3000 has been used for evidential breath testing in the U.K. for some years. Some individuals with lung diseases have difficulty in providing evidential breath samples using the device. This study describes an investigation that we have carried out on a newer instrument--the Lion Intoxilyzer 6000UK--which is now in use in the U.K. The study was designed to investigate the ability of subjects with a variety of lung diseases to provide evidential breath samples using this device. The 40 adult subjects investigated comprized 10 normal controls, 10 with asthma, 10 with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and 10 with restrictive lung disease. After baseline spirometry, subjects were given alcohol to drink, the quantity based upon body weight. After a gap of at least 20 min, subjects were asked to provide evidential breath samples in accordance with.the test procedure built into the Lion Intoxilyzer 6000UK. The results showed that two asthmatic subjects, four with COPD and three with restrictive lung disease failed to provide evidential breath samples even after four attempts. Despite the device requiring a minimum sample volume of 1.2 l, eight of the nine subjects who failed had a forced vital capacity (FVC) of more than 1.5 l. Seven of these nine subjects had a forced expiratory volume in 1 sec (FEV1) of less than 1.0 l. In conclusion, this study has shown that some subjects with lung diseases may have difficulty in providing evidential breath samples using the Lion Intoxilyzer 6000 UK.

Subjects with chronic obstructive airways disease may have difficulty with the roadside alcolmeter. Twenty-six subjects with a FEV1/FVC less than 60% were asked to use an alcolmeter simulator. Only ten were able to produce the necessary flow rate of 28 l min-1 for a minimum of 2.7 s, two could produce the same total volume (1.25 l) at 10 l min-1 for 7.5 s, five could only expel 10 l min-1 for 4.5 s, and nine were unable to trigger the alcolmeter at even these very low flow rates. Subjects with an FEV1 of less than 1.51 or FEV1% predicted less than 50% were very unlikely to be able to activate the alcolmeter. Ten healthy subjects were investigated to assess the accuracy of the roadside alcolmeter at a flow rate of 10 l min-1 compared to 40 l min-1. No significant difference was found in breath alcohol levels between the two flow rates. It is proposed that some modification could be made to the roadside alcolmeter, without affecting its accuracy, to allow some subjects with chronic obstructive lung disease to activate the device. A postal survey of 284 subjects with a FEV1/FVC less than 60% was carried out. Of those who were drivers or exdrivers, 24.7% had had to stop or reduce their driving because of their respiratory disease. This group had a significantly lower FEV1% predicted (P = 0.035) than those whose driving was unaffected.