Perbedaan Nilai FEV1 dan Perbedaan Nilai FEV1 dan FVC antara Perokok Putih dan Perokok Elektrik pada Remaja di Kota Bandung
Abstract
Abstract: Smoking behavior has become part of lifestyle of Indonesian society today and the figure tends to increase from year to year. Smoking has an impact particularly on the lung function. Nowadays there are two type cigarettes, burned cigarettes (white cigarettes) and electrical cigarette (e-cigarette). This study aims to distinguish the effects of both types cigarettes on FEV1 and FVC. This research uses descriptive analytic method with cross-sectional design (cross-sectional). A total sample of 48 people consists of 24 white smokers and 24 electrical smokers who had met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data collected by direct measurement using a spirometer. Data analysis presented by the result of independent t-test. The result of spirometry measurement on white smokers was 3.50 ± 0.54 for FEV1 and FVC is 3.63 ± 0.66 whereas the results obtained from electrical smoker is at 3.11 ± 0.58 for FEV1 and FVC is at 3.76 ± 0.85. There are significant differences between white smokers and smokers electrical on the value of Δ FEV1 (p = 0.004) but not significant in the value of Δ FVC (p = 0.896). This shows that the difference between FEV1 Best with FEV1 Pred on white smokers are better and getting closer to the normal value compared with an electric smoker.This could be because of the most previous electrical smoker is white smokers as well.
Abstrak: Perilaku merokok sudah menjadi bagian gaya hidup masyarakat Indonesia saat ini dan angkanya cenderung meningkat dari tahun ke tahunnya. Merokok memiliki dampak terutama terhadap fungsi paru-paru. Dewasa ini dikenal dua jenis rokok yaitu, rokok bakar (rokok putih) dan rokok elektrik (e-cigarette). Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk membedakan efek kedua jenis rokok tersebut terhadap FEV1 dan FVC.Penelitian ini menggunakan metode deskriptif analitik dengan desain potong lintang (cross sectional). Jumlah sampel sebanyak 48 orang yang terdiri dari 24 orang perokok putih dan 24 perokok elektrik yang telah memenuhi kriteria inklusi dan eksklusi. Data diambil dengan cara pengukuran langsung menggunakan spirometer. Analisis data disajikan berdasarkan hasil uji t-test independent.Hasil pengukuran spirometri pada perokok putih didapatkan nilai sebesar 3,50±0,54 untuk FEV1 sementara untuk FVC sebesar 3,63±0,66, sedangkan hasil pengukuran spirometri dari perokok elektrik adalah sebesar 3,11±0,58 untuk FEV1 sementara untuk FVC sebesar 3,76±0,85. Terdapat perbedaan yang signifikan antara perokok putih dan perokok elektrik pada nilai ∆ FEV1 (p=0,004) namun tidak signifikan pada nilai ∆ FVC (p=0,896). Hal ini menunjukkan bahwa selisih antara FEV1 Best dengan FEV1 Pred pada perokok putih lebih baik dan semakin mendekati nilai normal dibandingkan dengan perokok elektrik. Hal ini dapat disebabkan karena sebagian besar  perokok elektrik pernah menjadi perokok putih sebelumnya.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDF (Bahasa Indonesia)References
Action on Smoking and Health, 2015. Use of electronic cigarettes in great britain. , (October 2014), pp.1–5. Available at: http://www.ash.org.uk/files/documents/ASH_891.pdf.
American Thoracic Society, 2014. Pulmonary function tests. ATS Patient Education Series.
ASH, 2014. What’s in a cigarette. Available at: http://www.ash.org.uk/files/documents/ASH_117.pdf [Accessed February 6, 2016].
BALITBANGKES KEMENKES RI, 2013. Riset kesehatan dasar. Available at: http://www.depkes.go.id/resources/download/general/Hasil Riskesdas 2013.pdf [Accessed January 11, 2016].
Bellamy, D. et al., 2005. Spirometry in practice: a practical guide to using spirometry in primary care. Available at: https://www.brit-thoracic.org.uk/document-library/delivery-of-respiratory-care/spirometry/spirometry-in-practice/ [Accessed January 11, 2016].
Benowitz, N.L., 2014. Emerging nicotine delivery products. Annals of the American Thoracic Society.
Bushore, C. & Pizacani, B., 2014. Literature review. Available at: http://dhss.alaska.gov/dph/Chronic/Documents/Tobacco/PDF/2014_TPC_E-CigLitReview.pdf [Accessed February 6, 2016].
CDC, 2010. Highlights : Scientific review of findings regarding respiratory diseases. , pp.1–2.
Drummond, M.B. & Upson, D., 2014. Electronic cigarettes: potential harms and benefits. Annals of the American Thoracic Society, pp.236–242. Available at: http://www.atsjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1513/AnnalsATS.201311-391FR [Accessed January 11, 2016].
Gardiner, P., 2013. E-Cigarettes : the vapor this time ? , pp.1–19. Available at: http://www.trdrp.org/files/e-cigarettes/e-cigarettes-the-vapor-this-time.pdf [Accessed January 11, 2016].
Guyton & Hall, 2006. Pulmonary ventilation. In Textbook of Medical Physiology. Elsevier, p. 475.
Hajek, P. et al., 2014. Electronic cigarettes: review of use, content, safety, effects on smokers and potential for harm and benefit. Addiction, 109(11), pp.1801–1810.
Heijink, I.H. et al., 2012. Cigarette smoke impairs airway epithelial barrier function and cell-cell contact recovery. European Respiratory Journal, 39(2), pp.419–428. Available at: http://www.rug.nl/research/pathology/medbiol/pdf/cigsmokeinpairsairway.pdf.
Mcneill, A. et al., 2015. E-cigarettes : an evidence update a report commissioned by public health England. Public Health England, p.111. Available at: www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/454516/Ecigarettes_an_evidence_update_A_report_commissioned_by_Public_Health_England.pdf.
Miller, M.R. et al., 2005. Standardisation of spirometry. European Respiratory Journal, 26, pp.319–338. Available at: https://www.thoracic.org/statements/resources/pfet/PFT2.pdf [Accessed February 6, 2016].
National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, 2013. E-Cigarette factsheet. , (Figure 1), pp.1–8. Available at: http://rivm.nl/dsresource?type=pdf&disposition=inline&objectid=rivmp:242777&versionid=&subobjectname.
Pepper, J.K. & Eissenberg, T., 2014. Waterpipes and electronic cigarettes: increasing prevalenceand expanding science. Chemical Research in Toxicology, pp.1336–1343. Available at: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=97539164&site=ehost-live [Accessed February 6, 2016].
Polosa, R. et al., 2013. A fresh look at tobacco harm reduction : the case for the electronic cigarette.
Polosa, R., 2015. Electronic cigarette use and harm reversal : emerging evidence in the lung. BMC Medicine, 13(54), pp.10–13. Available at: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1741-7015/13/54.
Rahman, M.A. et al., 2014. Electronic cigarettes : patterns of use, health effects, use in smoking cessation and regulatory issues.
Soetiarto, F., 1995. Mengenal lebih jauh rokok kretek. Media Penelitian dan Pengembangan Kesehatan, pp.31–33. Available at: http://ejournal.litbang.depkes.go.id/index.php/MPK/article/download/733/894 [Accessed February 6, 2016].
Tortora, G.J., 2009. Pulmonary system anatomy. In Principles of Anatomy and Physiology. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., p. 885.
Vardavas, C.I., 2013. Impact on respiratory flow resistance, impedance, and exhaled nitric oxide. , pp.1–12. Available at: http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/769919_print [Accessed July 23, 2016].
World Health Organization, 2015. WHO global report on trends in prevalence of tobacco smoking. Available at: http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/156262/1/9789241564922_eng.pdf [Accessed February 4, 2016].
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.29313/kedokteran.v0i0.4431
