2018
DOI: 10.14474/ptrs.2018.7.4.147
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effect of air stacking training on pulmonary function, respiratory strength and peak cough flow in persons with cervical spinal cord injury

Abstract: Objective: This study investigated the effects of air stacking training (AST) on pulmonary function, respiratory strength, and peak cough flow (PCF) in persons with cervical spinal cord injury (CSCI). Design: Randomized controlled trial. Methods: A total of 24 persons with CSCI were randomly allocated to the AST group (n=12) or the incentive spirometry training (IST) group (n=12). Patients with CSCI received AST or IST for 15 minutes, with 3 sessions per week for 4 weeks, and all groups performed basic exercis… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

2
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…As no multi-player exercises existed, it was difficult to inspire competition, induce the desire to win, or motivate patients to perform exercises. Breathing exercises such as “air stacking training” and “spirometry training,” which are conducted in hospitals or at home, are effective [ 14 ], but they are considered uninteresting, making it difficult for patients to consistently perform these exercises. The developed devices utilize the remaining function of the cervical spinal cord to achieve the exercise goal with or without a companion, consequently improving breathing ability.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As no multi-player exercises existed, it was difficult to inspire competition, induce the desire to win, or motivate patients to perform exercises. Breathing exercises such as “air stacking training” and “spirometry training,” which are conducted in hospitals or at home, are effective [ 14 ], but they are considered uninteresting, making it difficult for patients to consistently perform these exercises. The developed devices utilize the remaining function of the cervical spinal cord to achieve the exercise goal with or without a companion, consequently improving breathing ability.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There is an increasing interest in assessing the level of physical functioning of severely ill patients and studies are being conducted to evaluate ICU-based interventions that can reduce these disorders [27][28][29]. In the exercise group, functional training, such as bedside functional training, balance training, and gait training assisted to improve physical performance or functional level [29]. Active functional training and rehabilitation in the ICU is consistent with research that improves functional levels, reduces movement restrictions, and improves muscle strength and gait ability [27].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In both trials, FVC and PCF increased over time; Jeong et al reported no between-group difference in FVC but a larger PCF improvement in the LVR group (baseline = 204 ± 129 L/min to post = 261 ± 126 L/min) compared with the incentive spirometry arm (240 ± 142 L/min to post = 249 ± 110 L/min) ( 223 ). In contrast, An and Shin found a greater FVC improvement in the LVR group compared with incentive spirometry, but no difference in PCF response ( 228 ). The applicability of these findings to medically stable NMDs is unclear given the time course post injury and natural history of recovery in SCI.…”
Section: Regular Lvr Therapymentioning
confidence: 96%
“…A comparator intervention was also included in the two RCTs that assessed the effect of LVR in people with cervical SCI. The participants were allocated to LVR or incentive spirometry (with the addition of inspiratory muscle strength training in one study) ( 228 ) for between 4 and 6 weeks ( 223 , 228 ). In both trials, FVC and PCF increased over time; Jeong et al reported no between-group difference in FVC but a larger PCF improvement in the LVR group (baseline = 204 ± 129 L/min to post = 261 ± 126 L/min) compared with the incentive spirometry arm (240 ± 142 L/min to post = 249 ± 110 L/min) ( 223 ).…”
Section: Regular Lvr Therapymentioning
confidence: 99%