International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2017
Transdiaphragmatic pressure and neural respiratory drive measured during inspiratory muscle training in stable patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.
СтатьяНаблюдательное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Wu Weiliang, Zhang Xianming, Lin Lin, Ou Yonger, Li Xiaoying, Guan Lili, Guo Bingpeng, Zhou Luqian, Chen Rongchang
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Inspiratory muscle training (IMT) is a rehabilitation therapy for stable patients with COPD. However, its therapeutic effect remains undefined due to the unclear nature of diaphragmatic mobilization during IMT. Diaphragmatic mobilization, represented by transdiaphragmatic pressure (Pdi), and neural respiratory drive, expressed as the corrected root mean square (RMS) of the diaphragmatic electromyogram (EMGdi), both provide vital information to select the proper IMT device and loads in COPD, therefore contributing to the curative effect of IMT. Pdi and RMS of EMGdi (RMSdi%) were measured and compared during inspiratory resistive training and threshold load training in stable patients with COPD.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Pdi and neural respiratory drive were measured continuously during inspiratory resistive training and threshold load training in 12 stable patients with COPD (forced expiratory volume in 1 s ± SD was 26.1%±10.2% predicted).
RESULTS: Pdi was significantly higher during high-intensity threshold load training (91.46±17.24 cmH2O) than during inspiratory resistive training (27.24±6.13 cmH2O) in stable patients with COPD, with P<0.01 for each. Significant difference was also found in RMSdi% between high-intensity threshold load training and inspiratory resistive training (69.98%±16.78% vs 17.26%±14.65%, P<0.01).
CONCLUSION: We concluded that threshold load training shows greater mobilization of Pdi and neural respiratory drive than inspiratory resistive training in stable patients with COPD.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Pdi and neural respiratory drive were measured continuously during inspiratory resistive training and threshold load training in 12 stable patients with COPD (forced expiratory volume in 1 s ± SD was 26.1%±10.2% predicted).
RESULTS: Pdi was significantly higher during high-intensity threshold load training (91.46±17.24 cmH2O) than during inspiratory resistive training (27.24±6.13 cmH2O) in stable patients with COPD, with P<0.01 for each. Significant difference was also found in RMSdi% between high-intensity threshold load training and inspiratory resistive training (69.98%±16.78% vs 17.26%±14.65%, P<0.01).
CONCLUSION: We concluded that threshold load training shows greater mobilization of Pdi and neural respiratory drive than inspiratory resistive training in stable patients with COPD.