Maximal Static Respiratory Pressures in the Normal Elderly

McElvaney, Noel G.; Blackie, Stephen P.; Morrison, Nancy; Wilcox, Pearce; Fairbarn,; Pardy, Richard L.

doi:10.1164/ajrccm/139.1.277

Cited by 107 publications

(67 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…We believe that the reductions in MRP, found for every two and three decades in both males and females, may be due to the aging process, a fact which is made more evident by the negative correlation verified between age and RMS. The negative correlations found between age and MRP for both sexes were high and corroborate the results found by Neder et al 1 and Vincken, Ghezzo and Cosio 24 , but diverge from those of Bruschi et al 26 and McElvaney et al 27 . Various hypotheses have tried to explain this negative correlation.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

Maximal respiratory pressure in healthy 20 to 89 year-old sedentary individuals of central São Paulo State

Simões¹,

Deus²,

Auad³

et al. 2010

Rev. bras. fisioter.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

Maximal respiratory pressure in healthy 20 to 89 year-old sedentary individuals of central São Paulo State

Simões¹,

Deus²,

Auad³

et al. 2010

Rev. bras. fisioter.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…However, despite significance, regression parameters were low, between-subject variability was high and only a small proportion of the total variance could be explained by demographic and anthropometric measures in both the present and previous studies [5,[8][9][10][11][13][14][15][16]. However, PI,max is a volitional test and hence can be submaximal and, therefore, variable.…”

Section: Resultscontrasting

confidence: 63%

“…Several studies aimed at assessing so-called normal values have been conducted in the past in order to facilitate interpretation of PI,max measurements in patients with impaired respiratory muscle function [3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Peak or plateau maximal inspiratory mouth pressure: which is best?

Windisch¹,

Hennings²,

Sorichter³

et al. 2004

Eur Respir J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is no clear evidence as to how maximal inspiratory mouth pressure (PI,max) should be measured, although plateau pressures sustained for 1 s and measured at residual volume (RV) are usually recommended.Peak and plateau PI,max were measured at RV and at functional residual capacity (FRC) in 533 healthy subjects (aged 10-90 yrs) in order to comparably test all PI,max measurements for their predictors, reproducibility and normal values.Plateau pressures accounted for 82.0-86.3% of peak pressures. Peak and plateau pressures measured at FRC accounted for 84.3-90.5% of pressures at RV, and were highly correlated. Age was negatively predictive and weight and body mass index positively predictive of PI,max, but regression parameters were low. All PI,max measurements were comparable when calculating regression parameters, between-subject variability and reproducibility.In conclusion, peak and plateau maximal inspiratory mouth pressure are comparably useful for the assessment of inspiratory muscle strength and can be reliably measured at functional residual capacity and at residual volume. Regression equations are of low impact in predicting normal values due to the weak influence of demographic and anthropometric factors and to the high unexplained between-subject-variability. Agerelated 5th percentiles can indicate the lower limit of the normal range. Eur Respir J 2004; 23: 708-713.

show abstract

“…The usefulness of maximal respiratory pressures is often debated because of the remarkably large interstudy variability in reference values in the literature [4,7,8,[16][17][18][19]. KOULOURIS et al [20] and TULLY et al [21] reported that maximal respiratory pressures depend much on the type of mouthpiece being used.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Face mask spirometry and respiratory pressures in normal subjects

Wohlgemuth¹,

Kooi²,

Hendriks³

et al. 2003

Eur Respir J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Spirometry and maximal respiratory pressures are pulmonary function parameters commonly used to evaluate respiratory function. Prediction values are available for conventional lung function devices using a standard tube or flanged type of mouthpiece connection. This equipment is not suitable for patients with facial or buccal muscle weakness, because of air leakage around the mouthpiece. A face mask was used for the portable lung function devices used in the neuromuscular department.The aim of this study was to compare the face mask and the conventional mouthpiece for the measurement of spirometry and of respiratory pressures in 22 healthy subjects.Values obtained with the conventional mouthpiece differed significantly from values obtained with the face mask. With the mask, forced vital capacity and forced expiratory volume in one second were 200 mL lower, and maximal expiratory pressure was 3.2 kPa lower than with the mouthpiece. Subsequently, new prediction values for face mask spirometry and maximal respiratory pressures were obtained from 252 other healthy subjects, from which new prediction equations were derived.It was concluded that the face mask connection to the lung function device is a valid alternative, is easy to use and is most useful to monitor changes in patients. This study confirms the importance of appropriate prediction equations, depending on subjectinstrument interfaces. Measurement of vital capacity (VC) and maximal respiratory pressures is commonly used to evaluate respiratory function and respiratory muscle strength in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or neuromuscular diseases [1][2][3]. Portable devices are useful for rapid and simple assessment of respiratory function in the office and at the bedside. Prediction values of spirometry and maximal respiratory pressures are available for portable and nonportable devices with a standard tube or a flanged type of mouthpiece connection [4][5][6][7][8]. This equipment is only suitable for subjects capable of making a good seal with their lips around the mouthpiece. However, patients with neuromuscular diseases characterised by facial or bulbar muscle weakness, e.g. amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, myasthenia gravis, myotonic dystrophy and facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy, often cannot effectively seal the lips around the mouthpiece, especially during forced manoeuvres such as spirometric and maximal respiratory pressure measurements [9,10]. In these cases, the conventional equipment with a tube or flanged type of mouthpiece is not adequate to evaluate respiratory muscle function. Therefore, a face mask adjusted to a portable spirometer and manometer was used to minimise air leakage in neuromuscular patients.The objective of this study was two-fold. First, possible differences in measurements between the original devices with the conventional mouthpiece and the face mask-adjusted devices were studied in healthy subjects. Secondly, a study to render new prediction equations for face mask spirometry and maximal re...

show abstract

Maximal Static Respiratory Pressures in the Normal Elderly

Cited by 107 publications

References 5 publications

Maximal respiratory pressure in healthy 20 to 89 year-old sedentary individuals of central São Paulo State

Maximal respiratory pressure in healthy 20 to 89 year-old sedentary individuals of central São Paulo State

Peak or plateau maximal inspiratory mouth pressure: which is best?

Face mask spirometry and respiratory pressures in normal subjects

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About