Bronchial provocation test measured by using the forced oscillation technique to assess airway responsiveness.

Background: The bronchial provocation test (BPT) performed by using the forced oscillation technique (FOT) is cooperated without forced expiratory effort. However, a comparison of the application value and safety of BPTs measured by using the FOT and the standardized dosimeter method is lacking, which limits its clinical practice. Objective: We aimed to analyze the diagnostic value and safety of the BPT as measured by the FOT in patients with asthma and in healthy subjects. Methods: This was a randomized cross-over clinical study. Airway responsiveness was measured by using the FOT and the aerosol provocation system (APS) dosimeter method in all the participants. The between-test interval was 24 hours. The diagnostic value and safety of the two tests were analyzed. Results: Asthma control status was assessed based on ACT scores, and patients with asthma (including 27 uncontrolled, 34 partially controlled, and 32 controlled) were collected, and 69 healthy subjects were recruited. Receiver operating characteristic curves revealed slightly superior screening capability of cumulative dose of methacholine causing a 20% decrease (PD20)-forced expiratory volume in the first second of expiration when measured by using the APS-dosimeter method (area under the curve [AUC] 0.981 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 0.952-1.000]) over that of cumulative dose of inhaled methacholine at the inflection point when respiratory resistance began to increase continuously (Dmin) by using the FOT (AUC 0.959 [95% CI, 0.924-0.994]). The sensitivity and specificity were 98.9% and 98.6%, respectively, with the APS-dosimeter method, and 100% and 87.0%, respectively, with the FOT. It took an average of 9.0 minutes (range, 6.0-11.0 minutes) when using the FOT and an average of 17.0 minutes (range, 14.0-25.0 minutes) when using APS-dosimeter method (p < 0.01) in all the participants. The measurement time for the FOT was reduced by 47.1% than the APS-dosimeter. The incidence rate of the adverse events with the FOT was slightly higher than that with the APS-dosimeter method (p < 0.05). Both tests were well tolerated. No serious adverse event was found. Conclusion: The FOT, characterized as being simple, safe, and time saving, could be used to assess airway hyperresponsiveness in patients with asthma and worthy of clinical application.