Resistance breathing with PEP and CPAP: effects on respiratory parameters
2014 (English)Doctoral thesis, comprehensive summary (Other academic)
Background: Positive expiratory pressure (PEP) and continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) are two forms of resistance breathing used in spontaneously breathing patients. With a threshold resistor or a flow resistor, both PEP and CPAP provide a positive (elevated) pressure level during the expiratory phase. With PEP, inspiratory pressure is negative, i.e. lower than ambient air pressure, as during a normal inspiration, but with CPAP, the inspiratory pressure is positive, i.e. higher than ambient air pressure.
Methods: This thesis is based on four separate studies in which four different breathing devices, a PEP-bottle (threshold resistor device), a PEP-mask (flow resistor device), a threshold resistor CPAP and a flow resistor device were investigated. Paper I, II and III are based on studies in healthy volunteers. Paper IV is a bench study performed in a hypobaric chamber. Paper I examined differences between two PEP devices, the PEP-bottle and the PEP-mask. Paper II evaluated the performance of a flow resistor CPAP device, (Boussignac CPAP). Paper III investigated the effect of two PEP-devices, a PEP-bottle and a PEP-mask and two CPAP devices, a threshold resistor CPAP and a flow resistor CPAP, on inspiratory capacity (IC). In paper IV, the effect of changes in ambient pressure on preset CPAP levels in two different CPAP devices was compared.
Results: With the PEP bottle, both expiration and inspiration began with a zero-flow period during which airway pressure changed rapidly. With the PEP-mask, the zero-flow period was very short and the change in airway pressure almost non-existent (paper I). During normal breathing with the Boussignac CPAP, changes in airway pressure were never large enough to reduce airway pressure below zero. During forced breathing, as airflow increased, both the drop in inspiratory airway pressure and the increase in expiratory airway pressure were potentiated (paper II). IC decreased significantly with three of the breathing devices, the PEP-mask and the two CPAP devices (paper III). With the threshold resistor CPAP, measured pressure levels were close to the preset CPAP level. With the flow resistor CPAP, as the altitude increased CPAP produced pressure levels increased (paper IV).
Conclusion: The effect on airway pressure, airflow, IC and the effect of changes in ambient air pressure differ between different kinds of resistance breathing devices. These differences in device performance should be taken into consideration when choosing the optimal resistance breathing device for each patient.
Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Umeå: Umeå universitet , 2014. , 72 p.
Umeå University medical dissertations, ISSN 0346-6612 ; 1674
Chest physiotherapy, breathing exercises, PEP, CPAP, airway pressure, airflow, threshold resistor, flow resistor, inspiratory capacity, Borg CR10
IdentifiersURN: urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-94650ISBN: 978-91-7601-127-0OAI: oai:DiVA.org:umu-94650DiVA: diva2:755348
2014-11-07, Sal B, Unod T, 9tr, Norrlands Universitetssjukhus, Umeå, 09:00 (Swedish)
Fagevik Olsèn, Monika, Docent
Winsö, Ola, ProfessorWadell, Karin, DocentÖhberg, Fredrik, PhD
List of papers