The present study compared four different sites and conditions for the measurement of maximal inspiratory pressure (MIP) and maximal expiratory pressure (MEP) in 38 spontaneous breathing tracheotomised patients. Of the patients, 28 had chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The four different conditions were: 1) through a cuff inflated cannula (condition A); 2) through the mouth with a deflated cannula (condition B); 3) through the mouth with a phonetic uncuffed cannula (condition C); and 4) through the mouth after stoma closure (condition D). Five trials in each condition were performed using a standardised method. The measurement of both MIP and MEP differed significantly depending on the condition of measurement. MIP taken in condition A was significantly higher when compared with conditions B, C and D. MEP in condition A was significantly higher when compared with condition B and D. In condition A the highest frequency of the best measurement of MIP and MEP was observed at the fourth and fifth effort, respectively. The same results were obtained after the selection of only COPD patients. In conclusion, respiratory muscle assessment differs significantly depending on measurement condition. Measurement through inflated cannula tracheotomy yields higher values of both maximal inspiratory and maximal expiratory pressure.

Maximal inspiratory and expiratory pressure measurement in tracheotomised patients / M., Vitacca; M., Paneroni; L., Bianchi; Clini, Enrico; A., Vianello; P., Ceriana; L., Barbano; B., Balbi; S., Nava. - In: EUROPEAN RESPIRATORY JOURNAL. - ISSN 0903-1936. - ELETTRONICO. - 27:(2006), pp. 343-349. [10.1183/09031936.06.00002705]

Maximal inspiratory and expiratory pressure measurement in tracheotomised patients

CLINI, Enrico;
2006

Abstract

The present study compared four different sites and conditions for the measurement of maximal inspiratory pressure (MIP) and maximal expiratory pressure (MEP) in 38 spontaneous breathing tracheotomised patients. Of the patients, 28 had chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The four different conditions were: 1) through a cuff inflated cannula (condition A); 2) through the mouth with a deflated cannula (condition B); 3) through the mouth with a phonetic uncuffed cannula (condition C); and 4) through the mouth after stoma closure (condition D). Five trials in each condition were performed using a standardised method. The measurement of both MIP and MEP differed significantly depending on the condition of measurement. MIP taken in condition A was significantly higher when compared with conditions B, C and D. MEP in condition A was significantly higher when compared with condition B and D. In condition A the highest frequency of the best measurement of MIP and MEP was observed at the fourth and fifth effort, respectively. The same results were obtained after the selection of only COPD patients. In conclusion, respiratory muscle assessment differs significantly depending on measurement condition. Measurement through inflated cannula tracheotomy yields higher values of both maximal inspiratory and maximal expiratory pressure.
2006
27
343
349
Maximal inspiratory and expiratory pressure measurement in tracheotomised patients / M., Vitacca; M., Paneroni; L., Bianchi; Clini, Enrico; A., Vianello; P., Ceriana; L., Barbano; B., Balbi; S., Nava. - In: EUROPEAN RESPIRATORY JOURNAL. - ISSN 0903-1936. - ELETTRONICO. - 27:(2006), pp. 343-349. [10.1183/09031936.06.00002705]
M., Vitacca; M., Paneroni; L., Bianchi; Clini, Enrico; A., Vianello; P., Ceriana; L., Barbano; B., Balbi; S., Nava
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.
Pubblicazioni consigliate

Licenza Creative Commons
I metadati presenti in IRIS UNIMORE sono rilasciati con licenza Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal, mentre i file delle pubblicazioni sono rilasciati con licenza Attribuzione 4.0 Internazionale (CC BY 4.0), salvo diversa indicazione.
In caso di violazione di copyright, contattare Supporto Iris

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11380/612624
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 5
  • Scopus 21
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 18
social impact