• Users Online: 94
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2013  |  Volume : 1  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 14-19

To compare the efficacy of incentive spirometry and resistive inspiratory devices on ventilatory muscle strength in patients with moderate dyspnea in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD)


1 Asst. Prof, College of Physiotherapy, Sumandeep Vidyapeeth, Piparia, Vadodara-391760, Gujarat, India
2 Sr. Lecturer, C.U. Shah Physiotherapy College, Surendranagar, Gujarat, India
3 Principal, C.U. Shah Physiotherapy College, Surendranagar, Gujarat, India

Correspondence Address:
Kalpesh Satani
Asst. Prof, College of Physiotherapy, Sumandeep Vidyapeeth, Piparia, Vadodara-391760, Gujarat
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/2347-6486.238975

Rights and Permissions

Backgrond: Dyspnea is one of the main complain of the COPD patients. In the general setting it is treated by medical and physiotherapeutic intervention. Incentive Spirometry and Resistive Inspiratory Devices are 2 main treatment approaches in physiotherapy. Objective: The objective of this study is to compare the efficacy of Incentive Spirometry and Resistive Inspiratory Devices on ventilatory muscle strength in COPD patients with mild to moderate dyspnea. Method: 30 COPD patients with mild to moderate dyspnea were randomly assigned to Incentive Spirometry group (Group A) and Resistive Inspiratory Device group (Group B). The duration of protocol was 4 weeks and both the groups received 2 sessions per day. Pre-treatment RPE and IC are compared with post-treatment data i.e, at the end of 4 weeks. Analysis was based on the ICS and Borg’s RPE scale. Results: The test showed significant improvement (p<0.05) in both ICS and RPE score. Using unpaired t-test mean improvement in group A and B was 566.06 ml and 695.2 ml respectively, t =1.049 (p=0.303) for ICS and using Mann-Whitney ‘U’ test median in group A and B was 2.5, U = 106 (p=0.782) for RPE score, since p>0.05 the comparison showed difference as not significant. This result showed that there is no significant difference between the 2 groups. Interpretation & Conclusion: It is concluded that there is no significant difference between the 2 groups. Both the interventions (Incentive Spirometer and Resistive Inspiratory Device) are equally effective, both in improving ventilatory muscle strength and reducing the perception of dyspnea in COPD patients with mild to moderate dyspnea.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed248    
    Printed23    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded38    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal