Search

Spirometry is required as part of the comprehensive evaluation of both adult and paediatric individuals with suspected or confirmed respiratory diseases and occupational assessments. It is used in the categorisation of impairment, grading of severity, assessment of potential progression and response to interventions. Guidelines for spirometry in South Africa are required to improve the quality, standardisation and usefulness in local respiratory practice. The broad principles of spirometry have remained largely unchanged from previous versions of the South African Spirometry Guidelines; however, minor adjustments have been incorporated from more comprehensive international guidelines, including adoption of the Global Lung Function Initiative 2012 (GLI 2012) spirometry reference equations for the South African population. All equipment should have proof of validation regarding resolution and consistency of the system. Daily calibration must be performed, and equipment quality control processes adhered to. It is important to have standard operating procedures to ensure consistency and quality and, additionally, strict infection control as highlighted during the COVID-19 pandemic.Adequate spirometry relies on a competent, trained operator, accurate equipment, standardised operating procedures, quality control and patient co-operation. All manoeuvres must be performed strictly according to guidelines, and strict quality assurance methods should be in place, including acceptability criteria (for any given effort) and repeatability (between efforts). Results must be categorised and graded according to current guidelines, taking into consideration the indication for the test.

We conducted two antibody surveys to assess risk factors for Marburg hemorrhagic fever in an area of confirmed Marburg virus transmission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Questionnaires were administered and serum samples tested for Marburg-specific antibodies by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Fifteen (2%) of 912 participants in a general village cross-sectional antibody survey were positive for Marburg immunoglobulin G antibody. Thirteen (87%) of these 15 were men who worked in the local gold mines. Working as a miner (odds ratio [OR] 13.9, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.1 to 62.1) and receiving injections (OR 7.4, 95% CI 1.6 to 33.2) were associated with a positive antibody result. All 103 participants in a targeted antibody survey of healthcare workers were antibody negative. Primary transmission of Marburg virus to humans likely occurred via exposure to a still unidentified reservoir in the local mines. Secondary transmission appears to be less common with Marburg virus than with Ebola virus, the other known filovirus.