M. Barral-Fernández , M.A. Jácome Pumar , S. Souto-Camba , L. González-Doniz , M.A. Ramón Belmonte , M. Amor-Barbosa , A. Arbillaga-Etxarri , G. Mazzucco , P. Bravo Cortés , T. del Corral , R. Martín-Valero , C. Llorca Cerdà , F. Murcia Lillo , J.A. Sánchez-Santos , M. Francín-Gallego , C. Martín Cortijo , E. García Delgado , C. Serrano Veguillas , A.B. Varas de la Fuente , P. San José Herranz , A. Lista-Paz
{"title":"西班牙健康儿科人群中最大呼吸压值与参考值的比较分析","authors":"M. Barral-Fernández , M.A. Jácome Pumar , S. Souto-Camba , L. González-Doniz , M.A. Ramón Belmonte , M. Amor-Barbosa , A. Arbillaga-Etxarri , G. Mazzucco , P. Bravo Cortés , T. del Corral , R. Martín-Valero , C. Llorca Cerdà , F. Murcia Lillo , J.A. Sánchez-Santos , M. Francín-Gallego , C. Martín Cortijo , E. García Delgado , C. Serrano Veguillas , A.B. Varas de la Fuente , P. San José Herranz , A. Lista-Paz","doi":"10.1016/j.ft.2025.03.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background and aim</h3><div>Maximal inspiratory and expiratory pressures (PImax/PEmax) are the most common test in clinical practice to assess respiratory muscle strength in different populations, even pediatrics. The main aim was to analyse to what extent the existing predictive equations for the maximal inspiratory and expiratory pressures in the Spanish pediatric population are reliable.</div></div><div><h3>Material and methods</h3><div>Cross-sectional study in 9<!--> <!-->autonomous communities that includes 164 healthy boys and girls aged 8-17 years. PImax/PEmax were performed using a digital manometer according to the standards of Spanish Society of Pulmonology and Thoracic Surgery (SEPAR). The results were compared with predictive equations proposed by Domènech-Clar <em>et al.</em> in 2003.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The sample consisted of 86 girls (11.5<!--> <!-->±<!--> <!-->2.7 years; PImax: 93.8<!--> <!-->±<!--> <!-->25 cmH<sub>2</sub>O; PEmax: 115.1<!--> <!-->±<!--> <!-->29 cmH<sub>2</sub>O) and 78 boys (12.2<!--> <!-->±<!--> <!-->2.8 years; PIM: 109<!--> <!-->±<!--> <!-->29.2 cmH<sub>2</sub>O; PEM: 132.7<!--> <!-->±<!--> <!-->33.3 cmH<sub>2</sub>O). Girls showed a significant difference between the observed and predictive values: 13.7<!--> <!-->±<!--> <!-->26.4 cmH<sub>2</sub>O (<em>P</em> <!--><<!--> <!-->.001) for PImax and 14.9<!--> <!-->±<!--> <!-->30.1 cmH<sub>2</sub>O (<em>P</em> <!--><<!--> <!-->.001) for PEmax. A significant difference was also observed for boys between observed and estimated PImax: 9.1<!--> <!-->±<!--> <!-->28.5 cmH<sub>2</sub>O (<em>P</em> <!-->=<!--> <!-->.006), without significant differences for PEmax.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>The predicted values from the available predictive equations for PImax and PEmax in the Spanish pediatric population differ significantly from the obtained values. The results of this study highlight the need of new reference equations in order to get representative values for Spanish children.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":34994,"journal":{"name":"Fisioterapia","volume":"47 4","pages":"Pages 184-193"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Análisis comparativo de los valores de las presiones respiratorias máximas con los valores de referencia en una población pediátrica española sana\",\"authors\":\"M. Barral-Fernández , M.A. Jácome Pumar , S. Souto-Camba , L. González-Doniz , M.A. Ramón Belmonte , M. Amor-Barbosa , A. Arbillaga-Etxarri , G. Mazzucco , P. Bravo Cortés , T. del Corral , R. Martín-Valero , C. Llorca Cerdà , F. Murcia Lillo , J.A. Sánchez-Santos , M. Francín-Gallego , C. Martín Cortijo , E. García Delgado , C. Serrano Veguillas , A.B. Varas de la Fuente , P. San José Herranz , A. Lista-Paz\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ft.2025.03.002\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background and aim</h3><div>Maximal inspiratory and expiratory pressures (PImax/PEmax) are the most common test in clinical practice to assess respiratory muscle strength in different populations, even pediatrics. The main aim was to analyse to what extent the existing predictive equations for the maximal inspiratory and expiratory pressures in the Spanish pediatric population are reliable.</div></div><div><h3>Material and methods</h3><div>Cross-sectional study in 9<!--> <!-->autonomous communities that includes 164 healthy boys and girls aged 8-17 years. PImax/PEmax were performed using a digital manometer according to the standards of Spanish Society of Pulmonology and Thoracic Surgery (SEPAR). The results were compared with predictive equations proposed by Domènech-Clar <em>et al.</em> in 2003.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The sample consisted of 86 girls (11.5<!--> <!-->±<!--> <!-->2.7 years; PImax: 93.8<!--> <!-->±<!--> <!-->25 cmH<sub>2</sub>O; PEmax: 115.1<!--> <!-->±<!--> <!-->29 cmH<sub>2</sub>O) and 78 boys (12.2<!--> <!-->±<!--> <!-->2.8 years; PIM: 109<!--> <!-->±<!--> <!-->29.2 cmH<sub>2</sub>O; PEM: 132.7<!--> <!-->±<!--> <!-->33.3 cmH<sub>2</sub>O). Girls showed a significant difference between the observed and predictive values: 13.7<!--> <!-->±<!--> <!-->26.4 cmH<sub>2</sub>O (<em>P</em> <!--><<!--> <!-->.001) for PImax and 14.9<!--> <!-->±<!--> <!-->30.1 cmH<sub>2</sub>O (<em>P</em> <!--><<!--> <!-->.001) for PEmax. A significant difference was also observed for boys between observed and estimated PImax: 9.1<!--> <!-->±<!--> <!-->28.5 cmH<sub>2</sub>O (<em>P</em> <!-->=<!--> <!-->.006), without significant differences for PEmax.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>The predicted values from the available predictive equations for PImax and PEmax in the Spanish pediatric population differ significantly from the obtained values. The results of this study highlight the need of new reference equations in order to get representative values for Spanish children.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":34994,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Fisioterapia\",\"volume\":\"47 4\",\"pages\":\"Pages 184-193\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Fisioterapia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0211563825000525\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Health Professions\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Fisioterapia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0211563825000525","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Health Professions","Score":null,"Total":0}
Análisis comparativo de los valores de las presiones respiratorias máximas con los valores de referencia en una población pediátrica española sana
Background and aim
Maximal inspiratory and expiratory pressures (PImax/PEmax) are the most common test in clinical practice to assess respiratory muscle strength in different populations, even pediatrics. The main aim was to analyse to what extent the existing predictive equations for the maximal inspiratory and expiratory pressures in the Spanish pediatric population are reliable.
Material and methods
Cross-sectional study in 9 autonomous communities that includes 164 healthy boys and girls aged 8-17 years. PImax/PEmax were performed using a digital manometer according to the standards of Spanish Society of Pulmonology and Thoracic Surgery (SEPAR). The results were compared with predictive equations proposed by Domènech-Clar et al. in 2003.
Results
The sample consisted of 86 girls (11.5 ± 2.7 years; PImax: 93.8 ± 25 cmH2O; PEmax: 115.1 ± 29 cmH2O) and 78 boys (12.2 ± 2.8 years; PIM: 109 ± 29.2 cmH2O; PEM: 132.7 ± 33.3 cmH2O). Girls showed a significant difference between the observed and predictive values: 13.7 ± 26.4 cmH2O (P < .001) for PImax and 14.9 ± 30.1 cmH2O (P < .001) for PEmax. A significant difference was also observed for boys between observed and estimated PImax: 9.1 ± 28.5 cmH2O (P = .006), without significant differences for PEmax.
Conclusions
The predicted values from the available predictive equations for PImax and PEmax in the Spanish pediatric population differ significantly from the obtained values. The results of this study highlight the need of new reference equations in order to get representative values for Spanish children.
FisioterapiaHealth Professions-Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
37
期刊介绍：
Publicación Oficial de la Sociedad Española de Fisioterapeutas. Sus páginas ofrecen desde artículos originales hasta revisiones, pasando por el estudio de casos o los actos más importantes relacionados con la especialidad.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
