Diaphragmatic strengthening exercises for patients with post COVID-19 condition after mild-to-moderate acute COVID-19 infection: a randomized controlled study.

IF 2.5 4区 医学 Q1 REHABILITATION
Tamer I Abo Elyazed, Ahmed Abd El-Moneim Abd El-Hakim, Ola I Saleh, Marwa Mostafa Fadel Sonbol, Hoda Assad Eid, Eman Moazen, Mohammad Hamad Alhassoon, Seham Ezzat Fathy Elfeky
{"title":"Diaphragmatic strengthening exercises for patients with post COVID-19 condition after mild-to-moderate acute COVID-19 infection: a randomized controlled study.","authors":"Tamer I Abo Elyazed, Ahmed Abd El-Moneim Abd El-Hakim, Ola I Saleh, Marwa Mostafa Fadel Sonbol, Hoda Assad Eid, Eman Moazen, Mohammad Hamad Alhassoon, Seham Ezzat Fathy Elfeky","doi":"10.2340/jrm.v56.25491","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess the clinical effects of incentive spirometry (IS) and diaphragmatic breathing (DB) in patients with post COVID-19 condition and diaphragmatic dysfunction as compared with the standard care alone.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The present longitudinal randomized study included 60 patients with post COVID-19 condition and diaphragmatic dysfunction. Patients were equally randomized to receive standard care plus IS (G1), standard care plus DB (G2) or standard care alone (G3) for 8 weeks. The primary outcome is clinical improvement as evaluated by the modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) dyspnoea scale.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Comparison between the studied groups revealed significant improvement in G1 and G2 in all parameters at the end of follow-up. However, no significant improvement was found in G3. At the end of follow-up, 15 patients (75.0%) in G1, 11 patients (55.0%) in G2, and 3 patients (15.0%) in G3 showed improvement on the mMRC dyspnoea scale. Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified mild acute COVID-19 infection (p = 0.009), use of IS (p < 0.001), and use of DB (p = 0.023) as significant predictors of improvement on the mMRC dyspnoea scale.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>IS or DB training in addition to the standard care in post COVID-19 condition was associated with better clinical improvement as compared with the standard care alone.</p>","PeriodicalId":54768,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11182030/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2340/jrm.v56.25491","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To assess the clinical effects of incentive spirometry (IS) and diaphragmatic breathing (DB) in patients with post COVID-19 condition and diaphragmatic dysfunction as compared with the standard care alone.

Methods: The present longitudinal randomized study included 60 patients with post COVID-19 condition and diaphragmatic dysfunction. Patients were equally randomized to receive standard care plus IS (G1), standard care plus DB (G2) or standard care alone (G3) for 8 weeks. The primary outcome is clinical improvement as evaluated by the modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) dyspnoea scale.

Results: Comparison between the studied groups revealed significant improvement in G1 and G2 in all parameters at the end of follow-up. However, no significant improvement was found in G3. At the end of follow-up, 15 patients (75.0%) in G1, 11 patients (55.0%) in G2, and 3 patients (15.0%) in G3 showed improvement on the mMRC dyspnoea scale. Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified mild acute COVID-19 infection (p = 0.009), use of IS (p < 0.001), and use of DB (p = 0.023) as significant predictors of improvement on the mMRC dyspnoea scale.

Conclusions: IS or DB training in addition to the standard care in post COVID-19 condition was associated with better clinical improvement as compared with the standard care alone.

轻度至中度急性 COVID-19 感染后 COVID-19 后遗症患者的横膈膜强化训练:随机对照研究。
目的评估诱导肺活量测定法(IS)和横膈膜呼吸法(DB)对 COVID-19 后遗症和横膈膜功能障碍患者的临床效果,并与单独的标准护理进行比较:本纵向随机研究包括 60 名 COVID-19 后遗症和膈肌功能障碍患者。患者随机接受标准护理加 IS(G1)、标准护理加 DB(G2)或单独标准护理(G3),为期 8 周。主要结果是通过改良医学研究委员会(mMRC)呼吸困难量表评估临床改善情况:研究组之间的比较显示,在随访结束时,G1 和 G2 在所有参数上都有明显改善。然而,G3 组没有明显改善。随访结束时,G1 组有 15 名患者(75.0%)、G2 组有 11 名患者(55.0%)、G3 组有 3 名患者(15.0%)在 mMRC 呼吸困难量表上有所改善。多变量逻辑回归分析确定了轻度急性 COVID-19 感染(p = 0.009)、使用 IS(p 结论:G1、G2 和 G3 患者的呼吸困难量表均有所改善:与单纯的标准护理相比,COVID-19 后患者在接受标准护理的同时接受 IS 或 DB 训练,临床症状会得到更好的改善。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
5.70%
发文量
102
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine is an international peer-review journal published in English, with at least 10 issues published per year. Original articles, reviews, case reports, short communications, special reports and letters to the editor are published, as also are editorials and book reviews. The journal strives to provide its readers with a variety of topics, including: functional assessment and intervention studies, clinical studies in various patient groups, methodology in physical and rehabilitation medicine, epidemiological studies on disabling conditions and reports on vocational and sociomedical aspects of rehabilitation.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信