302 Comparison of airway clearance techniques (ACT) in the cystic fibrosis (CF) population: a single case study report

Forster, Elizabeth; Swingwood, Ema; Nicholas, Ben; Bateman, K.

doi:10.1016/s1569-1993(14)60437-9

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…6 30 Most current literature in EIT is from the intensive care environment, 29 31 with few studies investigating EIT in CF. [32][33][34] Wettstein et al 34 demonstrated that EIT detected differences in ventilation distribution following ACT in a small cohort of nine CF adults, but reported high variability. These findings support further investigation of a larger sample of patients during ACT with a wide range of lung disease severity to assess whether the high intersubject variability observed is due to differences within the individual participants (eg, airway obstruction), or due to the inherent variability of EIT itself.…”

Section: Open Accessmentioning

confidence: 99%

Investigating outcome measures for assessing airway clearance techniques in adults with cystic fibrosis: protocol of a single-centre randomised controlled crossover trial

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionAirway clearance techniques (ACTs) are a gold standard of cystic fibrosis management; however, the majority of research evidence for their efficacy is of low standard; often attributed to the lack of sensitivity from outcome measures (OMs) used historically. This randomised controlled trial (RCT) investigates these standard OMs (sputum weight, forced expiratory volume in 1 s) and new OMs (electrical impedance tomography (EIT), multiple breath washout (MBW) and impulse oscillometry (IOS)) to determine the most useful measures of ACT.Methods and analysisThis is a single-centre RCT with crossover design. Participants perform MBW, IOS and spirometry, and then are randomised to either rest or supervised ACT lasting 30–60 min. MBW, IOS and spirometry are repeated immediately afterwards. EIT and sputum are collected during rest/ACT. On a separate day, the OMs are performed with the other intervention. Primary endpoint is difference in change in OMs before and after ACT/rest. Sample size was calculated with 80% power and significance of 5% for each OM (target n=64).Ethics and disseminationEthics approval was gained from the London–Chelsea Research Ethics Committee (reference 16/LO/0995, project ID 154635). Dissemination will involve scientific conference presentation and publication in a peer-reviewed journal.Trial registration numbersISRCTN11220163 and NCT02721498.

show abstract