Pressões respiratórias máximas: equipamentos e procedimentos usados por fisioterapeutas brasileiros

Montemezzo, Dayane; Velloso, Marcelo; Britto, Raquel Rodrigues; Parreira, Verônica Franco

doi:10.1590/s1809-29502010000200010

Cited by 14 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For Onaga et al 8 , the rectangular buccal device guarantees a minor air escape for MEP measures. However, Montemezzo et al 4 mostly used the tubular type buccal device, while Souza 21 considers the diver type the most indicated one.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Manovacuometry, also known as maximal respiratory pressures (MRP), consists of measuring maximum static respiratory pressures by a classic and reliable equipment, named manovacuometer [1][2][3][4] . This is a simple, fast, non-invasive, volunteer, and effortdependent test, in which the maximal inspiratory pressure (MIP) and the maximal expiratory pressure (MEP) are obtained 5,6 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Therefore, procedure standardization is necessary 3,11,12 . Studies have investigated other variables able to affect the values obtained, such as, for example, types of equipment, buccal pieces 8,10 , tracheas, manometers, air-escape orifice, use of nose clip, volunteer's posture when performing the tests, rest time between repetitions and between tests, maximum pressure definition, and lung (that in which the maneuver is carried out) volume determination [4][5][6] . In their studies, Onaga et al 8 , Koulouris et al 13 , and Gibson 10 concluded that different buccal types strongly influence measures of respiratory muscle pressures.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Manovacuometria realizada por meio de traqueias de diferentes comprimentos

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

| Manovacuometry is a simple, fast, and noninvasive test, with maximal inspiratory pressure (MIP) and maximal expiratory pressure (MEP) obtained to assist respiratory muscle assessment. Currently, there is a wide variety of models and brands of manovacuometers with different trachea diameters and lengths. However, the interference of these models in the measurements obtained by these equipments needs to be investigated.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Manovacuometria realizada por meio de traqueias de diferentes comprimentos

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To measure these pressures and thus quantify the strength of respiratory muscles, it used a digital manovacuometer that provides accurate result with evaluation 1 in 1 cmH 2 O, record the peak pressure in the display, allowing the values remain stored on the device, besides having 2 mm hole minimizes the cheek effect. The digital is recommended rather than the analog, because the latter makes it difficult to record the peak pressure, presents scale ranges from 4 cmH 2 O, easily descalibration and does not have the hole 2 mm 22 . In this study, most girls had lower values for inspiratory and expiratory pressures compared with boys in both groups.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Aeração nasal e força muscular respiratória em crianças respiradoras orais

Cunha

Bezerra

et al. 2015

Rev. CEFAC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Resumo: OBJETIVO: observar se existe relação entre força muscular respiratória e área da aeração nasal em crianças respiradoras orais. MÉTODOS: trata-se de um estudo do tipo observacional, transversal comparativo entre dois grupos. Participaram 32 crianças com Respiração Oral secundária à rinite alérgica (21 meninos e 11 meninas) e 30 respiradoras nasais sem rinite alérgica (09 meninos e 21 meninas), 7 a 12 anos, submetidas à avaliação da aeração nasal com o espelho de Altmann e à avaliação da força muscular respiratória com o manovacuômetro digital (MVD(r)30). RESULTADOS: não houve correlação entre aeração nasal e força muscular respiratória em cada subgrupo. Houve diferença comparando-se valores das pressões expiratórias máximas entre meninos e meninas respiradores orais (p=0,0064) e entre meninos e meninas respiradores nasais (p=0,0030). Também houve diferença das pressões inspiratórias máximas entre meninos e meninas respiradores orais (p=0,0324) e entre meninos e meninas respiradores nasais (p=0,0210). CONCLUSÃO: não foi possível confirmar a relação entre a área de aeração nasal e a força muscular respiratória nos respiradores orais.

show abstract

“…27 The selected interfaces were composed of a tube and a mouthpiece of varying dimensions and materials. Interface A was composed of a corrugated plastic tube 30 ϫ 2 cm and a smooth plastic mouthpiece (Hudson RCI, Temecula, California).…”

Section: What This Paper Contributes To Our Knowledgementioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of 4 Interfaces in the Assessment of Maximal Respiratory Pressures

Montemezzo¹,

Vieira²,

Tierra-Criollo³

et al. 2012

Respir Care

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND: The measurement of maximal respiratory pressure (MRP) is a procedure widely used in clinical practice to evaluate respiratory muscle strength through the maximal inspiratory pressure (P Imax ) and maximal expiratory pressure (P Emax ). Its clinical applications include diagnostic procedures and evaluating responses to interventions. However, there is great variability in the equipment and measurement procedures. Understanding the impacts of the characteristics of different interfaces can augment the repeatability of this method and help to establish widely applicable predictive equations. The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of 4 different interfaces on a subject's capacity to generate MRP and the impact of these interfaces on the repeatability of these measurements. METHODS: Fifty healthy subjects (mean ؎ SD age 26.36 ؎ 4.89 y) with normal spirometry were evaluated. MRP was measured by a digital manometer connected to 4 interfaces using different combinations of mouthpieces and tubes. The following variables were analyzed: maximum mean pressure, peak pressure, plateau pressure, and plateau variation. Analysis of variance for repeated measures or a Friedman test was used to compare the 4 interfaces, with P < .008 after Bonferroni adjustment considered significant. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between the 4 interfaces with respect to maximum mean pressure, peak pressure, plateau pressure, or plateau variation for P Imax (P > .49) or P Emax (P > .11), nor did the number of tests performed to fulfill the criteria of repeatability for P Imax (P ‫؍‬ .69) or P Emax (P ‫؍‬ .47) differ among the 4 interfaces. CONCLUSIONS: P Imax and P Emax values seem not to be influenced by the different interfaces studied, suggesting that patient comfort and availability of interfaces can be considered.

show abstract

Pressões respiratórias máximas: equipamentos e procedimentos usados por fisioterapeutas brasileiros

Cited by 14 publications

References 31 publications

Manovacuometria realizada por meio de traqueias de diferentes comprimentos

Manovacuometria realizada por meio de traqueias de diferentes comprimentos

Aeração nasal e força muscular respiratória em crianças respiradoras orais

Influence of 4 Interfaces in the Assessment of Maximal Respiratory Pressures

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About