Skip to content

Acute Effects of a Flutter Device and Chest Wall Compression on Respiratory System Impedance in Bronchiectasis Patients

Acute Effects of a Flutter Device and Chest Wall Compression on Respiratory System Impedance in Bronchiectasis Patients

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT02509637
Enrollment
40
Registered
2015-07-28
Start date
2015-08-31
Completion date
2016-09-30
Last updated
2017-02-23

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Bronchiectasis

Keywords

Respiratory System, Physical Therapy Modalities

Brief summary

Bronchiectasis is characterized pathologically by the abnormal and permanent dilation of bronchi caused mainly by the perpetuation of inflammation and impaired clearance of secretions. Physical therapy is essential in the treatment of these patients, using its various techniques and devices. The aim of this study is to evaluate the impedance of the respiratory system, by impulse oscillometry, after breathing exercises with chest compression or flutter in patients with bronchiectasis, considering that there are no results in the literature on the effect of these techniques in the small airways of these patients.

Detailed description

Bronchiectasis patients and healthy subjects will be evaluated before and after a 30 minutes session of control, breathing exercises with flutter valve, that is a device that produces oscillation and positive pressure during the expiratory phase, or chest compression, that is a manual manoeuvre in the right and left sides of the lower chest, all of them in a sitting position. The main outcome will be obtained by impulse oscillometry, that is a method to access large and small airways, to evaluate the resistance (R), reactance (X), reactance area (AX) and resonant frequency (Fres) of respiratory system for the whole breath and for inspiratory and expiratory phase. Additionally, will be analysed the dyspnea using the Medical Research Council scale; acceptability and tolerability scale; pulse oxymetry; difficulty of expectoration score; and volume, adhesivity and purulence of sputum.

Interventions

DEVICEFlutter

Flutter is a small device, simple, like a plastic pipe with a mouthpiece at one end and a perforated cover on the other, containing a steel ball resting in a plastic cone inside. When the patient exhales through the flutter expiratory flow causes movement of the ball, creating an oscillatory positive pressure.

OTHERChest Compression

Manual chest compression is based on the application of forces resulting from the action of respiratory muscles or physiotherapist manual action in order to increase the alveolar pressure creating a pressure gradient to promote change in pulmonary flow and volume.It consists of vigorous compression of the chest at the beginning of expiration or during expiration.

OTHERControl
OTHERImpulse Oscillometric

For this measure will be used IOS Jaeger (Jaeger, Wurzburg, Germany). to minimize the effect of the bad positioning of the tongue will use a mouth free-flow, which contains a depressant for keeping the tongue in the mouth soil, stabilizing it and reducing oral resistance. Volunteers will support hands firmly on the cheeks to reduce the effect of oscillation thereof. The measures will be carried out with the volunteer sitting, using nasal, relaxed and your head in neutral clip, breathing normally through the mouthpiece to his lips tightly sealed to prevent air leaks.

OTHERDyspnea scale

Dyspnea will be evaluated across the range Medical Research Council (MRC) for use in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in Brazil.

OTHERAcceptability and tolerance

patients will complete scales 1-7, 1: extremely and 7: none) on usefulness, ease to understand the instructions, easy to perform the exercises, degree of fatigue and discomfort

DEVICEPulse oximetry

During therapy the patient will remain monitored with digital oximeter and the information will be recorded before and after the procedures

OTHERDifficulty sputum

Patients inform the ease or difficulty sputum according to a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 = no difficulty and 5 = extremely difficult.

Sponsors

University of Sao Paulo
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
SINGLE (Investigator)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
30 Years to 80 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

* aged between 30 and 80 years * diagnosed with bronchiectasis not resulting from cystic fibrosis, defined by history and full clinical examination and confirmed by computed tomography.

Exclusion criteria

* Chest pain * acute hemoptysis * recent history rib fracture and pneumothorax * respiratory infection in the last 4 weeks prior to study * cystic fibrosis * asthma * fistula. * chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Respiratory System ImpedanceIn the primary evaluation, and after seven and fourteen days.Will be evaluated the resistance (R), reactance (X), reactance area (AX) and resonance frequency (Fres) before, immediately after the intervention and after 30 minutes of rest in order of identifying changes in the components of resistance of airways of individuals.
Difficulty sputumIn the primary evaluation, and after seven and fourteen days.Patients inform the ease or difficulty in expectoration in accordance with a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 = no difficulty and 5 = extremely difficult. (Burioka, 1998). The scale will be applied at baseline and always after the intervention to assess whether there is difference in the difficulty of sputum between sessions.
Secretions weightIn the primary evaluation, and after seven and fourteen days.The secretions are collected in the universal and heavy collectors on a precision balance.They will be evaluated in the total weight measurements and a dry weight and wet mucus. The weight of mucus of each interventions are compared to determine a technique with improved efficiency for removal of secretions.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Pulse oximetryIn the primary evaluation, and after seven and fourteen days.During therapy the patient will remain monitored with digital oximeter and the information will be recorded before and after the procedures
Adhesiveness of expectorated secretion:In the primary evaluation, and after seven and fourteen days.Immediately after the separation of secretion with saliva, mucus will be evaluated for its adhesion award a note according to visual scale described by Lopez-Vidriero et al., 1973. Test samples giving the adhesive index between 1 (fully adhered) and 2 (small movement under gravity) will be classified as adhesive and between 3 (slow moving mass) and 4 (easy handling) will be classified as non-adhesive.
Acceptability and toleranceIn the primary evaluation, and after seven and fourteen days.30 minutes after the treatment session or control, patients will complete scales 1-7, 1: extremely and 7: none) on usefulness, ease to understand the instructions, easy to perform the exercises, degree of fatigue and discomfort (adapted EATON, 2007).
Dyspnea scale:In the primary evaluation, and after seven and fourteen days.Dyspnea will be evaluated across the range Medical Research Council (MRC) for use in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in Brazil. The MRC scale comprises only five items, and the patient chooses the item corresponding to as dyspnea limits their activities of daily living. The patient reports its subjective degree of dyspnea choosing a value ranging from 1 to 5, with 1 (only suffers from shortness of breath during intense exercise), 2 (suffers from shortness of breath when walking briskly or climbing a slight slope) 3 (walks slower than people of the same age because of breathlessness or has to stop for breath even when walking slowly), 4 (stops for breath after walking less than 100 m or after a few minutes) and 5 (feel so short of breath that does not go over the house, or feel short of breath when getting dressed) (KOLEVIS et al., 2008).

Countries

Brazil

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 21, 2026