Impact of Inspiratory Muscle Training and Positive Expiratory Pressure on Lung Function and Extubation Success of ICU Patients: a Randomized Controlled Trial.

IF 2.9 Q1 EMERGENCY MEDICINE Archives of Academic Emergency Medicine Pub Date : 2024-07-21 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.22037/aaem.v12i1.2331
Mohammad Kazemi, Razieh Froutan, Ahmad Bagheri Moghadam
{"title":"Impact of Inspiratory Muscle Training and Positive Expiratory Pressure on Lung Function and Extubation Success of ICU Patients: a Randomized Controlled Trial.","authors":"Mohammad Kazemi, Razieh Froutan, Ahmad Bagheri Moghadam","doi":"10.22037/aaem.v12i1.2331","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Preparing patients for extubation from mechanical ventilation (MV) necessitates focused respiratory muscle strengthening. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of threshold inspiratory muscle training (IMT) and positive expiratory pressure (PEP) exercises on outcomes of patients who underwent MV in intensive care unit (ICU).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This randomized controlled trial was conducted in 2023 at the ICUs of Imam Reza Hospital, Mashhad, Iran. Participants were allocated to either intervention or control group (each comprising 35 patients) through block randomization. The intervention group received standard daily chest physiotherapy as well as targeted inspiratory and expiratory muscle strengthening exercises using the threshold IMT/PEP device, administered twice daily over one week. The control group received standard daily chest physiotherapy alone. Finally, the outcomes (lung compliance, duration of intubation, extubation success rate, and diaphragmatic metrics) of the two groups were compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>70 patients with the mean age of 56.10 ± 14.15 (range: 28.00-85.00) years were randomly divided into two groups (50% male). Significant improvements were observed in the intervention group regarding pulmonary compliance values (35.62 ± 4.43 vs. 30.85 ± 6.93; p= 0.001), peak expiratory flow (PEF) (55.20 ± 10.23 vs. 47.80 ± 11.26; p = 0.002), and maximum inspiratory pressure (MIP) (33.40 ± 4.25 vs. 30.08 ± 6.08; p = 0.01) compared to the control group. Diaphragm inspiratory thickness (0.29 ± 0.03 vs. 0.26 ± 0.04; p = 0.001), diaphragm expiratory thickness (0.22 ± 0.03 vs. 0.20 ± 0.04; p = 0.006) and motion (1.61 ± .29 vs. 1.48 ± .21; p = 0.04) also exhibited significant differences between the two groups. Extubation success rate was higher in the intervention group (68.60% vs. 40%; p = 0.01). The duration of mechanical ventilation was 15.14±7.07 days in the intervention group and 17.34±7.87 days in the control group (p = 0.20). The mean extubation time was 7.00 ± 1.88 days for the intervention group and 9.00 ± 2.00 days for the control (p < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Threshold IMT/PEP device exercises effectively enhance respiratory muscle strength, diaphragm thickness, and reduce ventilator dependency. These findings support their potential for inclusion in rehabilitation programs for ICU patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":8146,"journal":{"name":"Archives of Academic Emergency Medicine","volume":"12 1","pages":"e59"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11407536/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of Academic Emergency Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22037/aaem.v12i1.2331","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Preparing patients for extubation from mechanical ventilation (MV) necessitates focused respiratory muscle strengthening. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of threshold inspiratory muscle training (IMT) and positive expiratory pressure (PEP) exercises on outcomes of patients who underwent MV in intensive care unit (ICU).

Methods: This randomized controlled trial was conducted in 2023 at the ICUs of Imam Reza Hospital, Mashhad, Iran. Participants were allocated to either intervention or control group (each comprising 35 patients) through block randomization. The intervention group received standard daily chest physiotherapy as well as targeted inspiratory and expiratory muscle strengthening exercises using the threshold IMT/PEP device, administered twice daily over one week. The control group received standard daily chest physiotherapy alone. Finally, the outcomes (lung compliance, duration of intubation, extubation success rate, and diaphragmatic metrics) of the two groups were compared.

Results: 70 patients with the mean age of 56.10 ± 14.15 (range: 28.00-85.00) years were randomly divided into two groups (50% male). Significant improvements were observed in the intervention group regarding pulmonary compliance values (35.62 ± 4.43 vs. 30.85 ± 6.93; p= 0.001), peak expiratory flow (PEF) (55.20 ± 10.23 vs. 47.80 ± 11.26; p = 0.002), and maximum inspiratory pressure (MIP) (33.40 ± 4.25 vs. 30.08 ± 6.08; p = 0.01) compared to the control group. Diaphragm inspiratory thickness (0.29 ± 0.03 vs. 0.26 ± 0.04; p = 0.001), diaphragm expiratory thickness (0.22 ± 0.03 vs. 0.20 ± 0.04; p = 0.006) and motion (1.61 ± .29 vs. 1.48 ± .21; p = 0.04) also exhibited significant differences between the two groups. Extubation success rate was higher in the intervention group (68.60% vs. 40%; p = 0.01). The duration of mechanical ventilation was 15.14±7.07 days in the intervention group and 17.34±7.87 days in the control group (p = 0.20). The mean extubation time was 7.00 ± 1.88 days for the intervention group and 9.00 ± 2.00 days for the control (p < 0.001).

Conclusion: Threshold IMT/PEP device exercises effectively enhance respiratory muscle strength, diaphragm thickness, and reduce ventilator dependency. These findings support their potential for inclusion in rehabilitation programs for ICU patients.

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
吸气肌训练和呼气正压对 ICU 患者肺功能和拔管成功率的影响:随机对照试验。
介绍:为患者从机械通气(MV)拔管做准备需要重点加强呼吸肌。本研究旨在评估阈值吸气肌训练(IMT)和呼气正压训练(PEP)对重症监护病房(ICU)中接受机械通气的患者治疗效果的影响:这项随机对照试验于 2023 年在伊朗马什哈德的伊玛目礼萨医院重症监护室进行。参与者通过整群随机法被分配到干预组或对照组(每组 35 名患者)。干预组接受标准的日常胸部物理治疗,并使用阈值 IMT/PEP 设备进行有针对性的吸气和呼气肌肉强化训练,每天两次,持续一周。对照组仅接受标准的日常胸部物理治疗。最后,对两组的结果(肺顺应性、插管持续时间、拔管成功率和膈肌指标)进行比较:70 名患者随机分为两组(50% 为男性),平均年龄为 56.10 ± 14.15(28.00-85.00)岁。与对照组相比,干预组的肺顺应性值(35.62 ± 4.43 vs. 30.85 ± 6.93;P= 0.001)、呼气峰值流量(PEF)(55.20 ± 10.23 vs. 47.80 ± 11.26;P= 0.002)和最大吸气压力(MIP)(33.40 ± 4.25 vs. 30.08 ± 6.08;P= 0.01)均有明显改善。膈肌吸气厚度(0.29 ± 0.03 vs. 0.26 ± 0.04;p = 0.001)、膈肌呼气厚度(0.22 ± 0.03 vs. 0.20 ± 0.04;p = 0.006)和运动(1.61 ± .29 vs. 1.48 ± .21;p = 0.04)在两组之间也有显著差异。干预组的拔管成功率更高(68.60% vs. 40%; p = 0.01)。干预组的机械通气时间为(15.14±7.07)天,对照组为(17.34±7.87)天(P = 0.20)。干预组的平均拔管时间为(7.00±1.88)天,对照组为(9.00±2.00)天(p < 0.001):结论:阈值 IMT/PEP 装置练习可有效增强呼吸肌力量和膈肌厚度,并减少对呼吸机的依赖。这些研究结果支持将其纳入 ICU 患者的康复计划。
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
Archives of Academic Emergency Medicine
Archives of Academic Emergency Medicine Medicine-Emergency Medicine
CiteScore
8.90
自引率
7.40%
发文量
0
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊最新文献
The Burden of Head Injuries in Iran from 1990 to 2019: Findings from The Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. Traumatic Dental Injuries' Prevalence across Diverse Healthcare Settings: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index in Predicting the Mortality of Fournier's Gangrene: Analysis of 14-Year Statistics of Referral Center. 4-methylumbilliferon (4-MU) as a Potential Treatment Against Cerebral ischemia and Reperfusion Injury in Rats; An Experimental Study. Monkeypox: A Comprehensive Review of Virology, Epidemiology, Transmission, Diagnosis, Prevention, Treatment, and Artificial Intelligence Applications.
×
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