自主咳嗽的吸气方式和时间对咳流高峰的影响。

IF 2.1 Q1 REHABILITATION Annals of Rehabilitation Medicine-ARM Pub Date : 2023-04-01 DOI:10.5535/arm.22103
Fumiya Kotajima, Masakiyo Yatomi, Takeshi Hisada
{"title":"自主咳嗽的吸气方式和时间对咳流高峰的影响。","authors":"Fumiya Kotajima,&nbsp;Masakiyo Yatomi,&nbsp;Takeshi Hisada","doi":"10.5535/arm.22103","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To define the effect of the inspiratory method and cough timing on peak cough flow (PCF).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We investigated the effect of measurement conditions on PCF in healthy subjects (n=10). We then compared obstructive and restrictive pulmonary diseases (n=20) to assess for similar results in respiratory diseases. The PCF was measured under four conditions: before coughing, without maneuver 1 or with maneuver 2 a temporary respiratory pause (4-6 seconds) after rapid inspiration, and without maneuver 3 or with maneuver 4 a temporary respiratory pause after slow inspiration. After the measurements were completed, the PCF between the four conditions was compared for each subject group, and the effect size was calculated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>PCF of maneuvers 1 and 3 were significantly higher than maneuver 4 in healthy subjects (476.34±102.05 L/min and 463.44±107.14 L/min vs. 429.54±116.83 L/min, p<0.01 and p<0.05, respectively) and patients with restrictive pulmonary disease (381.96±145.31 L/min, 354.60±157.36 L/min vs. 296.94±137.49 L/min, p<0.01 and p<0.05, respectively). In obstructive pulmonary disease, maneuver 1 was significantly higher than maneuver 4 (327.42±154.73 L/min vs. 279.48±141.10 L/min, p<0.05). The largest effect sizes were shown by maneuvers 4 and 1.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>PCF depends on changes in inspiratory speed before coughing and on temporary respiratory pauses after maximal inspiration. It will become necessary to unify the measurement methods for coughing strength and present appropriate coughing methods.</p>","PeriodicalId":47738,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Rehabilitation Medicine-ARM","volume":"47 2","pages":"118-128"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/c6/04/arm-22103.PMC10164520.pdf","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effect of the Inspiratory Method and Timing of Voluntary Cough on Peak Cough Flow.\",\"authors\":\"Fumiya Kotajima,&nbsp;Masakiyo Yatomi,&nbsp;Takeshi Hisada\",\"doi\":\"10.5535/arm.22103\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To define the effect of the inspiratory method and cough timing on peak cough flow (PCF).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We investigated the effect of measurement conditions on PCF in healthy subjects (n=10). We then compared obstructive and restrictive pulmonary diseases (n=20) to assess for similar results in respiratory diseases. The PCF was measured under four conditions: before coughing, without maneuver 1 or with maneuver 2 a temporary respiratory pause (4-6 seconds) after rapid inspiration, and without maneuver 3 or with maneuver 4 a temporary respiratory pause after slow inspiration. After the measurements were completed, the PCF between the four conditions was compared for each subject group, and the effect size was calculated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>PCF of maneuvers 1 and 3 were significantly higher than maneuver 4 in healthy subjects (476.34±102.05 L/min and 463.44±107.14 L/min vs. 429.54±116.83 L/min, p<0.01 and p<0.05, respectively) and patients with restrictive pulmonary disease (381.96±145.31 L/min, 354.60±157.36 L/min vs. 296.94±137.49 L/min, p<0.01 and p<0.05, respectively). In obstructive pulmonary disease, maneuver 1 was significantly higher than maneuver 4 (327.42±154.73 L/min vs. 279.48±141.10 L/min, p<0.05). The largest effect sizes were shown by maneuvers 4 and 1.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>PCF depends on changes in inspiratory speed before coughing and on temporary respiratory pauses after maximal inspiration. It will become necessary to unify the measurement methods for coughing strength and present appropriate coughing methods.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47738,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annals of Rehabilitation Medicine-ARM\",\"volume\":\"47 2\",\"pages\":\"118-128\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/c6/04/arm-22103.PMC10164520.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annals of Rehabilitation Medicine-ARM\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5535/arm.22103\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"REHABILITATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Rehabilitation Medicine-ARM","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5535/arm.22103","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

目的:探讨吸气方式和咳嗽时间对咳峰流量的影响。方法:研究测量条件对健康受试者PCF的影响(n=10)。然后,我们比较了阻塞性和限制性肺疾病(n=20),以评估呼吸系统疾病的相似结果。在四种情况下测量PCF:咳嗽前,快速吸气后不采用手法1或采用手法2短暂呼吸暂停(4-6秒),缓慢吸气后不采用手法3或采用手法4短暂呼吸暂停。测量完成后,比较各受试者组四种情况下的PCF,并计算效应量。结果:健康受试者的PCF分别为476.34±102.05 L/min和463.44±107.14 L/min,分别高于429.54±116.83 L/min。结论:PCF与咳嗽前吸气速度变化和最大吸气后短暂呼吸暂停有关。因此,有必要统一咳嗽强度的测量方法,提出合适的咳嗽方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

摘要图片

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
Effect of the Inspiratory Method and Timing of Voluntary Cough on Peak Cough Flow.

Objective: To define the effect of the inspiratory method and cough timing on peak cough flow (PCF).

Methods: We investigated the effect of measurement conditions on PCF in healthy subjects (n=10). We then compared obstructive and restrictive pulmonary diseases (n=20) to assess for similar results in respiratory diseases. The PCF was measured under four conditions: before coughing, without maneuver 1 or with maneuver 2 a temporary respiratory pause (4-6 seconds) after rapid inspiration, and without maneuver 3 or with maneuver 4 a temporary respiratory pause after slow inspiration. After the measurements were completed, the PCF between the four conditions was compared for each subject group, and the effect size was calculated.

Results: PCF of maneuvers 1 and 3 were significantly higher than maneuver 4 in healthy subjects (476.34±102.05 L/min and 463.44±107.14 L/min vs. 429.54±116.83 L/min, p<0.01 and p<0.05, respectively) and patients with restrictive pulmonary disease (381.96±145.31 L/min, 354.60±157.36 L/min vs. 296.94±137.49 L/min, p<0.01 and p<0.05, respectively). In obstructive pulmonary disease, maneuver 1 was significantly higher than maneuver 4 (327.42±154.73 L/min vs. 279.48±141.10 L/min, p<0.05). The largest effect sizes were shown by maneuvers 4 and 1.

Conclusion: PCF depends on changes in inspiratory speed before coughing and on temporary respiratory pauses after maximal inspiration. It will become necessary to unify the measurement methods for coughing strength and present appropriate coughing methods.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
7.70%
发文量
32
审稿时长
30 weeks
期刊最新文献
Factors Affecting Life Satisfaction Among People With Physical Disabilities During COVID-19: Observational Evidence from a Korean Cohort Study. Motor Function Measurement in Children: Gross Motor Function Measure (GMFM). Coexistence of Non-Lower Body Mass Index and Exercise Habits Reduce Readmission in Older Patients With Heart Failure. Change in Plantar Pressure and Plain Radiography in Pediatric Flexible Flatfoot: A Retrospective Cohort Study. Cross-Cultural Translation and Validation of the Thai Version of the Scale for the Assessment and Rating of Ataxia (SARA-TH).
×
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