2013
DOI: 10.1589/jpts.25.1633
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Differences of the Truncal Expansion and Respiratory Function between Children with Spastic Diplegic and Hemiplegic Cerebral Palsy

Abstract: [Purpose] We attempted to determine whether differences of respiratory function could be found in terms of truncal expansion, respiratory muscle strength, and pulmonary function test (PFT) between children with spastic diplegic and hemiplegic cerebral palsy. [Subjects and Methods] We recruited 19 children with spastic diplegic CP (diplegic-CP group) and 10 children with spastic hemiplegic CP (hemiplegic-CP group). For all the children, clinical factors associated with respiratory functions were assessed in ter… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

1
13
0
2

Year Published

2014
2014
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 17 publications
(16 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
1
13
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Respiratory pressure and the PFT have been used to measure the strength of respiration muscles and lung capacity, which is one of routine procedures for measurement of respiratory function, along with PFT. These findings are supported by several previous studies, indicating that children who were capable of more vigorous physical activity showed better respiratory function compared with children without independent walking ability14,15,16 ) . The low cardiopulmonary capacity in CP is due to restrictive lung dysfunction resulting from limited movement and not because of parenchymal lung dysfunction3, 17, 18 ) .…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 88%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Respiratory pressure and the PFT have been used to measure the strength of respiration muscles and lung capacity, which is one of routine procedures for measurement of respiratory function, along with PFT. These findings are supported by several previous studies, indicating that children who were capable of more vigorous physical activity showed better respiratory function compared with children without independent walking ability14,15,16 ) . The low cardiopulmonary capacity in CP is due to restrictive lung dysfunction resulting from limited movement and not because of parenchymal lung dysfunction3, 17, 18 ) .…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 88%
“…It is a generalized fact that walking disability can accompany respiratory dysfunction in children with CP, which together result in disturbance of normal motor development and restriction of functional activity in daily life14, 19, 20 ) . Elucidation of differences in respiration function and effectiveness of respiratory training according to walking ability is an important clinical issue.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…All speech systems: respiration, phonation, resonance, prosody and articulation are usually involved, although the degree of impairment in the function of each subsystem can vary between individuals (Workinger and Kent ). Limited respiratory control has been observed in shallow tidal volume, use of paradoxical breathing patterns and difficulties coordinating exhalation with phonation (Solomon and Charron , Kwon and Lee , ). Impairment in laryngeal function has been perceived in harsh and breathy voice qualities, reduced pitch range and unwanted pitch breaks (Workinger and Kent , Ciocca et al .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It was found that children with spastic diplegic cerebral palsy had lower respiratory parameters than children with spastic hemiplegic cerebral palsy. Depending on the type of disability, biomechanical insufficiencies, weak respiratory muscles, and low volumetric ventilation affect respiratory mechanism (15). Although no statistically significant difference was found between children with level 2 and below and with level 3 and above with respect to %FVC values according to MACS, the values were higher in children with better levels.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 81%