Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
Volume 90, Issue 6 , Pages 913-918 , June 2009

Rationale of the Combined Use of Inspiratory and Expiratory Devices in Improving Maximal Inspiratory Pressure and Maximal Expiratory Pressure of Patients With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

  • Elvia Battaglia, MD

      Affiliations

    • Pulmonary Department, San Carlo Borromeo Hospital, Milan, Italy
    • ,
  • Alessandro Fulgenzi, BSci

      Affiliations

    • Institute of General Pathology, University of the Study, Milan, Italy
    • ,
  • Maria Elena Ferrero, MD

      Affiliations

    • Institute of General Pathology, University of the Study, Milan, Italy
    • Corresponding Author InformationReprint requests to Maria Elena Ferrero, MD, Istituto di Patologia Generale, Università degli Studi di Milano, Via Luigi Mangiagalli, 31, 20133 Milano, Italy

  • Image Result

    Respivol and Respilift are depicted. Upper panel, Respilift alone. Lower panel, 2 combined devices.

    Respivol and Respilift are depicted. Upper panel, Respilift alone. Lower panel, 2 combined devices.

  • Image Result

    (A) MIP and (B) MEP values, expressed in cmH2O, measured in patients with COPD (sham training control and training group) at different times from the beginning of the training with Respilift associate

    (A) MIP and (B) MEP values, expressed in cmH2O, measured in patients with COPD (sham training control and training group) at different times from the beginning of the training with Respilift associated with Respivol. *P<.05 vs basal, 1 month and 6 months of sham training control group and vs basal and 1 month of training group; **P<.01 vs basal, 1 month, 6 months, and 12 months of sham training control group and vs basal, 1 month, and 6 months of training group.

  • Image Result
    Dyspnea grade values expressed by Borg scale, in basal condition and at different times of training. *P<.05 vs basal, 1 month, and 6 months of sham training control group and vs basal and 1 month of t

    Dyspnea grade values expressed by Borg scale, in basal condition and at different times of training. *P<.05 vs basal, 1 month, and 6 months of sham training control group and vs basal and 1 month of training group; **P<.01 vs basal, 1 month, 6 months, and 12 months of sham training control group and vs basal, 1 month, and 6 months of training group.

 No commercial party having a direct financial interest in the results of the research supporting this article has or will confer a benefit on the authors or on any organization with which the authors are associated.

PII: S0003-9993(09)00184-1

doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2008.12.019

Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
Volume 90, Issue 6 , Pages 913-918 , June 2009

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution