IMPROVEMENT IN EXPIRATORY FLOWRATE IN ASTHMATICS NEBULIZED IN SITTING VS LYING DOWN-POSITION: A COMPARATIVE STUDY

M. Zahid, A. Saeed, SA Rauf, S. Khan
{"title":"IMPROVEMENT IN EXPIRATORY FLOWRATE IN ASTHMATICS NEBULIZED IN SITTING VS LYING DOWN-POSITION: A COMPARATIVE STUDY","authors":"M. Zahid, A. Saeed, SA Rauf, S. Khan","doi":"10.54112/bcsrj.v2024i1.965","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Asthma, a chronic inflammatory disorder of the airways, is characterized by variable and recurring symptoms, reversible airflow obstruction, and bronchospasm. Objectives: The main objective of the study is to find the improvement in expiratory flowrate in asthmatics nebulized in sitting vs lying down-position. Methods: This comparative study was conducted at CMH, Lahore during May 2023 to May 2024 and data were collected from 245 patients. Each participant received a standardized dose of a bronchodilator via a nebulizer. In the sitting position group, patients were instructed to sit upright in a comfortable chair with back support. In the lying down position group, patients were instructed to lie supine on a flat surface. Both groups received the nebulized medication for the same duration, and all procedures were conducted in a controlled clinical environment. Results: Data were collected from 245 patients. The average age was similar between the two groups (45.09 ± 12.12 years for sitting and 44.87 ± 11.09 years for lying down). The gender distribution was nearly equal, with a slightly higher number of females in both groups. Baseline FEV1 values were 1.85 ± 0.35 L for the sitting group and 1.88 ± 0.37 L for the lying down group, while baseline PEFR values were 300 ± 45 L/min and 310 ± 48 L/min, respectively. The study found that the mean change in PEFR was significantly greater in the sitting position group (+60 ± 15 L/min) compared to the lying down position group (+30 ± 12 L/min), with a difference of +30 L/min (95% CI: 18 to 42, p < 0.001). Conclusion: It is concluded that nebulizing asthmatic patients in a sitting position significantly improves expiratory flow rates compared to a lying down position.","PeriodicalId":504575,"journal":{"name":"Biological and Clinical Sciences Research Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biological and Clinical Sciences Research Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54112/bcsrj.v2024i1.965","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Asthma, a chronic inflammatory disorder of the airways, is characterized by variable and recurring symptoms, reversible airflow obstruction, and bronchospasm. Objectives: The main objective of the study is to find the improvement in expiratory flowrate in asthmatics nebulized in sitting vs lying down-position. Methods: This comparative study was conducted at CMH, Lahore during May 2023 to May 2024 and data were collected from 245 patients. Each participant received a standardized dose of a bronchodilator via a nebulizer. In the sitting position group, patients were instructed to sit upright in a comfortable chair with back support. In the lying down position group, patients were instructed to lie supine on a flat surface. Both groups received the nebulized medication for the same duration, and all procedures were conducted in a controlled clinical environment. Results: Data were collected from 245 patients. The average age was similar between the two groups (45.09 ± 12.12 years for sitting and 44.87 ± 11.09 years for lying down). The gender distribution was nearly equal, with a slightly higher number of females in both groups. Baseline FEV1 values were 1.85 ± 0.35 L for the sitting group and 1.88 ± 0.37 L for the lying down group, while baseline PEFR values were 300 ± 45 L/min and 310 ± 48 L/min, respectively. The study found that the mean change in PEFR was significantly greater in the sitting position group (+60 ± 15 L/min) compared to the lying down position group (+30 ± 12 L/min), with a difference of +30 L/min (95% CI: 18 to 42, p < 0.001). Conclusion: It is concluded that nebulizing asthmatic patients in a sitting position significantly improves expiratory flow rates compared to a lying down position.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
坐姿与卧姿雾化治疗哮喘患者呼气流速的改善:一项比较研究
哮喘是一种慢性气道炎症性疾病,其特点是症状多变且反复发作、气流阻塞可逆和支气管痉挛。研究目的研究的主要目的是发现坐位与卧位雾化吸入哮喘患者呼气流速的改善情况。研究方法:这项比较研究于 2023 年 5 月至 2024 年 5 月期间在拉合尔 CMH 进行,收集了 245 名患者的数据。每位参与者都通过雾化器接受了标准剂量的支气管扩张剂。在坐姿组,患者被要求直立坐在有背部支撑的舒适椅子上。在卧姿组,患者被要求仰卧在平坦的地面上。两组患者接受雾化药物治疗的时间相同,所有过程均在可控的临床环境中进行。结果共收集了 245 名患者的数据。两组患者的平均年龄相似(坐着时为 45.09 ± 12.12 岁,躺着时为 44.87 ± 11.09 岁)。两组患者的性别分布基本相同,女性人数略多。坐姿组的 FEV1 基线值为 1.85 ± 0.35 L,卧姿组为 1.88 ± 0.37 L,PEFR 基线值分别为 300 ± 45 L/min 和 310 ± 48 L/min。研究发现,与卧姿组(+30 ± 12 L/min)相比,坐姿组 PEFR 的平均变化明显更大(+60 ± 15 L/min),差异为 +30 L/min (95% CI: 18 to 42, p < 0.001)。结论结论:与卧姿相比,对哮喘患者进行坐姿雾化可显著提高呼气流速。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
DOES PREOPERATIVE COUNSELLING HELP IMPROVE PATIENTS’ SATISFACTION WITH PAIN MANAGEMENT IN POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD SAFETY AND EFFICACY OF DUAL ANTIPLATELET THERAPY IN PAKISTANI PATIENTS UNDERGOING PCI: A MULTICENTER STUDY EVALUATION OF CHICKPEA VARIETIES FOR CLIMATE RESILIENCE AND YIELD STABILITY AT DIFFERENT PLANTING DATES A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF ANESTHETIC BLOCK TECHNIQUES (V-BLOCK VS. H-BLOCK) FOR REMOVAL OF INGROWN TOENAIL ROLE OF CHYMOTRYPSIN IN POST-OPERATIVE WOUND MANAGEMENT IN PATIENTS UNDERGOING ELECTIVE INGUINAL HERNIA REPAIR SURGERIES
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1