Tapered Flow Resistive Loading Research Articles

Inspiratory Muscle Training Using Tapered Flow Resistive Loading to Enhance Pulmonary Function in Smokers: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Inspiratory Muscle Training Using Tapered Flow Resistive Loading to Enhance Pulmonary Function in Smokers: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Diaphragm thickness and mobility elicited by two different modalities of inspiratory muscle loading in heart failure participants: A randomized crossover study.

To analyze diaphragmatic thickness, at end-inspiration and end-expiration, diaphragmatic thickening index and mobility via US under two different modalities of inspiratory muscle loading, in two different modalities of inspiratory muscle loading and different load intensities at full-vital capacity maneuvers and the relationship between diaphragmatic thickness with pulmonary function tests in participants with HF. This randomized crossover trial, enrolled with 17 HF subjects, evaluated diaphragm thickness (Tdi, mm), fractional thickness (TFdi, %), and mobility (mm) US during low and high intensities (30% and 60% of maximal inspiratory pressure-MIP) with two modalities of inspiratory muscle loading mechanical threshold loading (MTL) and tapered flow-resistive loading (TFRL). Both MTL and TFRL produced a increase in Tdi, but only with high intensity loading compared to baseline-2.21 (0.26) vs. 2.68 (0.33) and 2.73 (0.44) mm; p = .01. TFdi was greater than baseline under all conditions, except during low intensity of TFRL. Diaphragm mobility was greater than baseline under all conditions, and high intensity of TFRL elicited greater mobility compared to all other conditions. Additionally, baseline Tdi was moderately correlated with pulmonary function tests. MTL and TFRL modalities elicit similar increases in diaphragm thickness at loads, but only during high intensity loading it was greater than baseline. Diaphragm mobility was significantly greater than baseline under both loads and devices, and at high intensity compared to low intensity, although TFRL produced greater mobility compared to modalities of inspiratory muscle loading. There is an association between diaphragm thickness and pulmonary function tests.

Comparing two types of loading during inspiratory muscle training in patients with weaning difficulties: An exploratory study

BackgroundInspiratory muscle training improves respiratory muscle function and may improve weaning outcomes in patients with weaning difficulties. Compared to the commonly used pressure threshold loading, tapered flow resistive loading better accommodates pressure–volume relationships of the respiratory muscles, which might help to facilitate application of external loads and optimise training responses. ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to compare acute breathing pattern responses and perceived symptoms during an inspiratory muscle training session performed against identical external loading provided as pressure threshold loading or as tapered flow resistive loading. We hypothesised that for a given loading, tapered flow resistive loading would allow larger volume expansion and higher inspiratory flow responses and consequently higher external work of breathing and power than pressure threshold loading and that subsequently patients perceived fewer symptoms during tapered flow resistive loading than during pressure threshold loading. MethodsIn this exploratory study, 21 patients (maximal inspiratory pressure: 35 ± 14 cmH2O and vital capacity:0.85 L±0.37 L) performed two training sessions against external loads equalling 42 ± 15% of maximal inspiratory pressure provided either as pressure threshold loading or as tapered flow resistive loading. During these training sessions, breath-by-breath data of breathing parameters were collected, and patients rated their perceived breathing effort, dyspnoea, and unpleasantness. ResultsCompared to pressure threshold loading, tapered flow resistive loading allowed significantly larger volume expansion (0.53 ± 0.28 L versus 0.41 ± 0.20 L, p < 0.01) and inspiratory flow responses (0.43 ± 0.20 L/s versus 0.33 ± 0.16 L/s, p = 0.01). Tapered flow resistive loading was perceived as less unpleasant (3.1 ± 1.9 versus 3.8 ± 2.4, p = 0.048). No significant differences in breathing effort, dyspnoea, work of breathing, and power were observed. ConclusionsFor a given loading, inspiratory muscle training with tapered flow resistive loading allowed larger volume expansion and higher inspiratory flow responses than pressure threshold loading, which led patients to perceive tapered flow resistive loading as less unpleasant. This might help us to facilitate early implementation of inspiratory muscle training in patients with weaning difficulties. Clinical trial registration numberClinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT03240263

Acute thoracoabdominal and hemodynamic responses to tapered flow resistive loading in healthy adults

We investigated the acute physiological responses of tapered flow resistive loading (TFRL) at 30, 50 and 70 % maximal inspiratory pressure (PImax) in 12 healthy adults to determine an optimal resistive load. Increased end-inspiratory rib cage and decreased end-expiratory abdominal volumes equally contributed to the expansion of thoracoabdominal tidal volume (captured by optoelectronic plethysmography). A significant decrease in end-expiratory thoracoabdominal volume was observed from 30 to 50 % PImax, from 30 to 70 % PImax, and from 50 to 70 % PImax. Cardiac output (recorded by cardio-impedance) increased from rest by 30 % across the three loading trials. Borg dyspnoea increased from 2.36 ± 0.20 at 30 % PImax, to 3.45 ± 0.21 at 50 % PImax, and 4.91 ± 0.25 at 70 % PImax. End-tidal CO2 decreased from rest during 30, 50 and 70 %PImax (26.23 ± 0.59, 25.87 ± 1.02 and 24.30 ± 0.82 mmHg, respectively). Optimal intensity for TFRL is at 50 % PImax to maximise global respiratory muscle and cardiovascular loading whilst minimising hyperventilation and breathlessness.

Training Specificity of Inspiratory Muscle Training Methods: A Randomized Trial.

IntroductionInspiratory muscle training (IMT) protocols are typically performed using pressure threshold loading with inspirations initiated from residual volume (RV). We aimed to compare effects of three different IMT protocols on maximal inspiratory pressures (PImax) and maximal inspiratory flow (V̇Imax) at three different lung volumes. We hypothesized that threshold loading performed from functional residual capacity (FRC) or tapered flow resistive loading (initiated from RV) would improve inspiratory muscle function over a larger range of lung volumes in comparison with the standard protocol.Methods48 healthy volunteers (42% male, age: 48 ± 9 years, PImax: 110 ± 28%pred, [mean ± SD]) were randomly assigned to perform three daily IMT sessions of pressure threshold loading (either initiated from RV or from FRC) or tapered flow resistive loading (initiated from RV) for 4 weeks. Sessions consisted of 30 breaths against the highest tolerable load. Before and after the training period, PImax was measured at RV, FRC, and midway between FRC and total lung capacity (1/2 IC). V̇Imax was measured at the same lung volumes against a range of external threshold loads.ResultsWhile PImax increased significantly at RV and at FRC in the group performing the standard training protocol (pressure threshold loading from RV), it increased significantly at all lung volumes in the two other training groups (all p < 0.05). No significant changes in V̇Imax were observed in the group performing the standard protocol. Increases of V̇Imax were significantly larger at all lung volumes after tapered flow resistive loading, and at higher lung volumes (i.e., FRC and 1/2 IC) after pressure threshold loading from FRC in comparison with the standard protocol (all p < 0.05).ConclusionOnly training with tapered flow resistive loading and pressure threshold loading from functional residual capacity resulted in consistent improvements in respiratory muscle function at higher lung volumes, whereas improvements after the standard protocol (pressure threshold loading from residual volume) were restricted to gains in PImax at lower lung volumes. Further research is warranted to investigate whether these results can be confirmed in larger samples of both healthy subjects and patients.

Maximal Dynamic Inspiratory Pressure Evaluation in Heart Failure: A Comprehensive Reliability and Agreement Study

The purpose of this study was to analyze the reliability (interrater and intrarater) and agreement (repeatability and reproducibility) properties of tapered flow resistive loading (TFRL) measures in patients with heart failure (HF). For this cross-sectional study, participants were recruited from the cardiopulmonary rehabilitation program at the University of Brasilia from July 2015 to July 2016. All patients participated in the study, and 10 were randomly chosen for intrarater and interrater reliability testing. The 124 participants with HF (75% men) were 57.6 (SD=1.81) years old and had a mean left ventricular ejection fraction of 38.9% (SD=15%) and a peak oxygen consumption of 13.05 (SD=5.3) mL·kg·min-1. The main outcome measures were the maximal inspiratory pressure (MIP) measured with a standard manovacuometer (SM) and the MIP and maximal dynamic inspiratory pressure (S-Index) obtained with TFRL. The S-Index reliability (interrater and intrarater) was examined by 2 evaluators, the S-Index repeatability was examined with 10 repetitions, and the reproducibility of the MIP and S-Index was measured with SM and TFRL, respectively. The reliability analysis revealed high S-Index interrater and intrarater reliability values (intraclass correlation coefficients [ICCs] of 0.89 [95% CI=0.58-0.98] and 0.97 [95% CI=0.89-0.99], respectively). Repeatability analyses revealed that 8 maneuvers were required to reach the maximum S-Index in 75.81% (95% CI=68.27-83.34) of the population. The reproducibility of TFRL measures (S-Index=68.8 [SD=32.8] cm H2O; MIP=66 [SD=32.3] cm H2O) was slightly lower than that of the SM measurement (MIP=70.1 [SD=35.9] cm H2O). The TFRL device provided a reliable intrarater and interrater S-Index measure in patients with HF and had acceptable repeatability, requiring 8 maneuvers to produce a stable S-Index measure. The reproducibilities of the S-Index, MIP obtained with SM, and MIP obtained with TRFL were similar. TRFL is a feasible method to assess both MIP and the S-index as measures of inspiratory muscle strength in patients with HF and can be used for inspiratory muscle training, making the combined testing and training capabilities important in both clinical research and the management of patients with HF.

Can inspiratory muscle training improve weaning outcomes in difficult to wean patients? A protocol for a randomised controlled trial (IMweanT study)

IntroductionRespiratory muscle dysfunction has been associated with failure to wean from mechanical ventilation. It has therefore been hypothesised that these patients might benefit from inspiratory muscle training (IMT). Evidence, however,...