Journal of pediatric nursing · 2026
Effectiveness of three preparation methods on pulmonary function test performance and procedure-related fear in children: A three-arm randomized controlled trial.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Gunes Sümeyye Nur, Kucukoglu Sibel
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Successful spirometry in children requires adequate cooperation and correct respiratory maneuvers. This study compared routine verbal instruction, verbal instruction with demonstration, and animation-assisted preparation for pediatric spirometry.
METHODS: This three-arm randomized controlled trial included 96 children aged 6-12 years referred to a tertiary pediatric pulmonary function test unit. Children were stratified-randomized to verbal instruction, verbal instruction with demonstration, or animation-assisted preparation (n = 32 each). Data were collected using the Descriptive Characteristics Form, Pulmonary Function Test Parameters Form, and Children's Fear Scale. Pulmonary function was assessed during the first three acceptable maneuvers, and fear before and after testing.
RESULTS: Baseline characteristics and pulmonary function were similar across groups (p > 0.05). Forced inspiratory vital capacity was higher in the animation-assisted group at the second measurement (mean difference = 0.50, 95% CI 0.11-0.89) and in the verbal instruction group at the third measurement (mean difference = 0.63, 95% CI 0.22-1.04), both compared with demonstration. Peak expiratory flow was higher in the animation-assisted group than in the demonstration group at the third measurement (mean difference = 0.66, 95% CI 0.13-1.19; p < 0.05). No significant group×time interactions were observed for pulmonary function (all p > 0.05) or fear (F = 0.03, p = 0.973, η2 = 0.001), although fear decreased in all groups.
CONCLUSION: Animation improved selected spirometry parameters without consistent superiority. Fear decreased similarly across all groups, suggesting that animation may be a useful alternative for preparing children for spirometry.
IMPLICATIONS TO PRACTICE: Selective differences in pulmonary function did not demonstrate overall superiority of any preparation method, supporting flexible selection based on clinical context and resources.
CLINICALTRIALS: govIdentifier:NCT07713225.
METHODS: This three-arm randomized controlled trial included 96 children aged 6-12 years referred to a tertiary pediatric pulmonary function test unit. Children were stratified-randomized to verbal instruction, verbal instruction with demonstration, or animation-assisted preparation (n = 32 each). Data were collected using the Descriptive Characteristics Form, Pulmonary Function Test Parameters Form, and Children's Fear Scale. Pulmonary function was assessed during the first three acceptable maneuvers, and fear before and after testing.
RESULTS: Baseline characteristics and pulmonary function were similar across groups (p > 0.05). Forced inspiratory vital capacity was higher in the animation-assisted group at the second measurement (mean difference = 0.50, 95% CI 0.11-0.89) and in the verbal instruction group at the third measurement (mean difference = 0.63, 95% CI 0.22-1.04), both compared with demonstration. Peak expiratory flow was higher in the animation-assisted group than in the demonstration group at the third measurement (mean difference = 0.66, 95% CI 0.13-1.19; p < 0.05). No significant group×time interactions were observed for pulmonary function (all p > 0.05) or fear (F = 0.03, p = 0.973, η2 = 0.001), although fear decreased in all groups.
CONCLUSION: Animation improved selected spirometry parameters without consistent superiority. Fear decreased similarly across all groups, suggesting that animation may be a useful alternative for preparing children for spirometry.
IMPLICATIONS TO PRACTICE: Selective differences in pulmonary function did not demonstrate overall superiority of any preparation method, supporting flexible selection based on clinical context and resources.
CLINICALTRIALS: govIdentifier:NCT07713225.