No abstract

It is interesting to be aware that there is no Randomized Clinical Trials (RCT) research article except a few case-study reports which have been reported about the physical therapy (PT) intervention for stiff person syndrome (SPS). This study was designed to determine the benefits of PT in cases with SPS through analysis of case reports, thereby to raise awareness among physical therapist about the most beneficial PT interventions for SPS. We executed acomputer-based search with a diagnosis of SPS who underwent PT and articles published only in English. We selected case-study reports because of nonavailability of RCT articles to review the complaints, deformities, contractures, precipitating factors, interventions, outcomes, results, disability, and benefits of PT management among SPS. We concluded that PT training is substantiated to be a necessary and beneficial intervention in rehabilitation of patients with SPS.

The Flutter is a medical handheld device, which is designed for patients suffering from various lung diseases. This device is designed to mobilize the excessive secretion of in the direction of airways and helps to loosen the mucus from the lungs and removed. Sometimes mucous in the lungs can become thick and hard to clear from the airways. If this mucous stays in the airways, it could block them, making it harder to breathe. Infection is also possible when mucous stays trapped in the airways. When one breathes out through the Flutter, it causes the ball inside to bounce. This bouncing causes increased pressure inside the chest and sends vibrations down through the airways. The combination of increased pressure and vibrations helps the mucous move from the lungs into the airways where it can be coughed out. Some patients cannot blow very forcefully, so our project is designed in such a way that the resistance of the blow is measured using a strain gauge. If the value goes below the certain threshold, limit the beep sound is heard and a light indication is provided so that we can find whether the patient should blow out even more faster. This device is small, portable, and easy to use and has no side effects.

BACKGROUND: Flutter is a device used in removing excess lung secretions. The conventional flutter lacks a biofeedback component to facilitate optimal use by the patients. OBJECTIVE: The current research aims to compare the effects of biofeedback flutter devices with the conventional flutter in managing the symptoms of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases. METHODS: One hundred and sixty-eight participants were randomly allocated into four groups: Group A (conventional), Group B (visual biofeedback), Group C (auditory biofeedback) and Group D (visual and auditory biofeedback). All groups were treated five days for 20 minutes. Outcome measures included wet sputum weight [during intervention (T1) and 1 hour after intervention (T2)], oxygen saturation and dyspnea score (before and after intervention) on all days. RESULTS: The wet sputum expectorated (T2) by Group B was significantly higher than Group A (P< 0.001), Group C (P< 0.001) and Group D (P< 0.05). The dyspnea score for Group B (P< 0.05), Group C (P< 0.05) and Group D (P< 0.05) was significantly lower than Group A. The post-intervention oxygen saturation level was higher in Group D followed by Groups B, C and A. CONCLUSION: The use of biofeedback flutter is effective in the removal of secretion, reducing dyspnea and improving oxygen saturation when compared to conventional flutter.