OBJECTIVE: To evaluate breathing pattern and thoracoabdominal motion during breathing exercises. METHODS: Twenty-four patients with class II or III obesity (18 women; 6 men) were studied on the second postoperative day after gastroplasty. The mean age was 37 +/- 11 years, and the mean BMI was 44 +/- 3 kg/m(2). Diaphragmatic breathing, incentive spirometry with a flow-oriented device and incentive spirometry with a volume-oriented device were performed in random order. Respiratory inductive plethysmography was used in order to measure respiratory variables and thoracoabdominal motion. RESULTS: Comparisons among the three exercises showed significant differences: tidal volume was higher during incentive spirometry (with the flow-oriented device or with the volume-oriented device) than during diaphragmatic breathing; the respiratory rate was lower during incentive spirometry with the volume-oriented device than during incentive spirometry with the flow-oriented device; and minute ventilation was higher during incentive spirometry (with the flow-oriented device or with the volume-oriented device) than during diaphragmatic breathing. Rib cage motion did not vary during breathing exercises, although there was an increase in thoracoabdominal asynchrony, especially during incentive spirometry with the flow-oriented device. CONCLUSIONS: Among the breathing exercises evaluated, incentive spirometry with the volume-oriented device provided the best results, because it allowed slower, deeper inhalation.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate breathing pattern and thoracoabdominal motion during breathing exercises. METHODS: Twenty-four patients with class II or III obesity (18 women; 6 men) were studied on the second postoperative day after gastroplasty. The mean age was 37 +/- 11 years, and the mean BMI was 44 +/- 3 kg/m(2). Diaphragmatic breathing, incentive spirometry with a flow-oriented device and incentive spirometry with a volume-oriented device were performed in random order. Respiratory inductive plethysmography was used in order to measure respiratory variables and thoracoabdominal motion. RESULTS: Comparisons among the three exercises showed significant differences: tidal volume was higher during incentive spirometry (with the flow-oriented device or with the volume-oriented device) than during diaphragmatic breathing; the respiratory rate was lower during incentive spirometry with the volume-oriented device than during incentive spirometry with the flow-oriented device; and minute ventilation was higher during incentive spirometry (with the flow-oriented device or with the volume-oriented device) than during diaphragmatic breathing. Rib cage motion did not vary during breathing exercises, although there was an increase in thoracoabdominal asynchrony, especially during incentive spirometry with the flow-oriented device. CONCLUSIONS: Among the breathing exercises evaluated, incentive spirometry with the volume-oriented device provided the best results, because it allowed slower, deeper inhalation.