Transdiaphragmatic pressure and neural respiratory drive measured during inspiratory muscle training in stable patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
Authors Wu W, Zhang X, Lin L, Ou Y, Li X, Guan L, Guo B, Zhou L, Chen R
Received 2 November 2016
Accepted for publication 19 January 2017
Published 2 March 2017 Volume 2017:12 Pages 773—781
Checked for plagiarism Yes
Review by Single anonymous peer review
Peer reviewer comments 4
Editor who approved publication: Dr Richard Russell
Weiliang Wu,1 Xianming Zhang,2 Lin Lin,1 Yonger Ou,1 Xiaoying Li,1 Lili Guan,1 Bingpeng Guo,1 Luqian Zhou,1 Rongchang Chen1
1State Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease, Guangzhou Institute of Respiratory Disease, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, 2Department of Respiratory Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guizhou Medical University, Guizhou, People’s Republic of China
Purpose: Inspiratory muscle training (IMT) is a rehabilitation therapy for stable patients with COPD. However, its therapeutic effect remains undefined due to the unclear nature of diaphragmatic mobilization during IMT. Diaphragmatic mobilization, represented by transdiaphragmatic pressure (Pdi), and neural respiratory drive, expressed as the corrected root mean square (RMS) of the diaphragmatic electromyogram (EMGdi), both provide vital information to select the proper IMT device and loads in COPD, therefore contributing to the curative effect of IMT. Pdi and RMS of EMGdi (RMSdi%) were measured and compared during inspiratory resistive training and threshold load training in stable patients with COPD.
Patients and methods: Pdi and neural respiratory drive were measured continuously during inspiratory resistive training and threshold load training in 12 stable patients with COPD (forced expiratory volume in 1 s ± SD was 26.1%±10.2% predicted).
Results: Pdi was significantly higher during high-intensity threshold load training (91.46±17.24 cmH2O) than during inspiratory resistive training (27.24±6.13 cmH2O) in stable patients with COPD, with P<0.01 for each. Significant difference was also found in RMSdi% between high-intensity threshold load training and inspiratory resistive training (69.98%±16.78% vs 17.26%±14.65%, P<0.01).
Conclusion: We concluded that threshold load training shows greater mobilization of Pdi and neural respiratory drive than inspiratory resistive training in stable patients with COPD.
Keywords: diaphragmatic electromyogram, inspiratory threshold load training, inspiratory resistive training, pulmonary rehabilitation, respiratory physiological detection
This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.Download Article [PDF] View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]