Comparison of three protocols for measuring the maximal respiratory pressures

Introduction To avoid the selection of submaximal efforts during the assessment of maximal inspiratory and expiratory pressures (MIP and MEP), some reproducibility criteria have been suggested. Criteria that stand out are those proposed by the American Thoracic Society (ATS) and European Respiratory...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Fisioterapia em movimento 2015-03, Vol.28 (1), p.31-39
Hauptverfasser: Pessoa, Isabela Maria B. Sclauser, Coelho, Cristina Martins, Mendes, Liliane Patrícia de Souza, Montemezzo, Dayane, Pereira, Danielle Aparecida Gomes, Parreira, Verônica Franco
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Introduction To avoid the selection of submaximal efforts during the assessment of maximal inspiratory and expiratory pressures (MIP and MEP), some reproducibility criteria have been suggested. Criteria that stand out are those proposed by the American Thoracic Society (ATS) and European Respiratory Society (ERS) and by the Brazilian Thoracic Association (BTA). However, no studies were found that compared these criteria or assessed the combination of both protocols. Objectives To assess the pressure values selected and the number of maneuvers required to achieve maximum performance using the reproducibility criteria proposed by the ATS/ERS, the BTA and the present study. Materials and method 113 healthy subjects (43.04 ± 16.94 years) from both genders were assessed according to the criteria proposed by the ATS/ERS, BTA and the present study. Descriptive statistics were used for analysis, followed by ANOVA for repeated measures and post hoc LSD or by Friedman test and post hoc Wilcoxon, according to the data distribution. Results The criterion proposed by the present study resulted in a significantly higher number of maneuvers (MIP and MEP – median and 25%-75% interquartile range: 5[5-6], 4[3-5] and 3[3-4] for the present study criterion, BTA and ATS/ERS, respectively; p < 0.01) and higher pressure values (MIP – mean and 95% confidence interval: 103[91.43-103.72], 100[97.19-108.83] and 97.6[94.06-105.95]; MEP: median and 25%-75% interquartile range: 124.2[101.4-165.9], 123.3[95.4-153.8] and 118.4[95.5-152.7]; p < 0.05). Conclusion The proposed criterion resulted in the selection of pressure values closer to the individual’s maximal capacity. This new criterion should be considered in future studies concerning MIP and MEP measurements. Introdução Para evitar a seleção de esforços submáximos durante as medidas das pressões inspiratórias e expiratórias máximas (PImáx e PEmáx), alguns critérios de reprodutibilidade têm sido sugeridos, destacando-se os propostos pela ATS/ERS e pela SBPT. Entretanto, não foram encontrados na literatura estudos que confrontem esses dois critérios, ou que investiguem a combinação de ambos. Objetivos Avaliar os valores pressóricos selecionados e o número de manobras necessárias para se alcançar a capacidade máxima por meio do emprego dos critérios de reprodutibilidade propostos pela ATS/ERS, pela SBPT e pelo presente estudo. Materiais e métodos Foram avaliados 113 indivíduos saudáveis (43,04 ± 16,94 anos), de ambos os sexos, conside
ISSN:0103-5150
1980-5918
0103-5150
DOI:10.1590/0103-5150.028.001.AO03