Satoko Naitoh1, Katsuyuki Tomita2, Keita Sakai3, Akira Yamasaki4, Yuji Kawasaki4, Eiji Shimizu5. 1. Physical Therapist, Department of Rehabilitation, Le Santerion Yodoe Nursing Home, Yonago, Tottori, Japan. 2. Medical Doctor, Department of Respiratory Medicine, Yonago Medical Center, Yonago, Tottori, Japan. Electronic address: Tomita-katsuyuki@nho-yonago.jp. 3. Physical Therapist, Department of Physical Therapy, YMCA College of Medical & Human Services, Yonago, Tottori, Japan. 4. Medical Doctor, Division of Medical Oncology and Molecular Respirology, Department of Multidisciplinary Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Tottori University, Yonago, Tottori, Japan. 5. Professor, Division of Medical Oncology and Molecular Respirology, Department of Multidisciplinary Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Tottori University, Yonago, Tottori, Japan.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of different recumbent positions on pulmonary function, chest wall motion, and feelings of discomfort in young nonobese healthy volunteers. METHODS: Twenty healthy volunteers (age, 28.0±1.4 years; height, 167.5±10.1 cm; weight, 62.3±10.2 kg) were studied in the sitting position and in the following 6 recumbent positions: supine, left retroversion at a 45° tilt, left anteversion at a 45° tilt, right retroversion at a 45° tilt, right anteversion at a 45° tilt, and prone. After 5 minutes of a selected position, pulmonary functions, including vital capacity (VC), forced expiratory volume in 1 second, maximal inspiratory and expiratory mouth pressures (MIP and MEP, respectively), and breathing pattern components at the chest wall were assessed. Discomfort was assessed using a modified Borg scale. RESULTS: When participants changed position from sitting to each of the 6 recumbent positions, forced expiratory volume in 1 second values decreased significantly (P < .05). None of the participants showed changes in the MIP or MEP in any of the 6 recumbent positions. Rib cage motion was restricted in all recumbent positions except supine, left anteversion at a 45° tilt, and prone. In all 6 recumbent positions, discomfort was experienced during the pulmonary tests. However, in the left retroversion at a 45° tilt position, no discomfort was experienced during the MIP and MEP assessments. CONCLUSION: In young, nonobese, healthy volunteers, recumbent positions caused diminished pulmonary functions and induced feelings of discomfort.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of different recumbent positions on pulmonary function, chest wall motion, and feelings of discomfort in young nonobese healthy volunteers. METHODS: Twenty healthy volunteers (age, 28.0±1.4 years; height, 167.5±10.1 cm; weight, 62.3±10.2 kg) were studied in the sitting position and in the following 6 recumbent positions: supine, left retroversion at a 45° tilt, left anteversion at a 45° tilt, right retroversion at a 45° tilt, right anteversion at a 45° tilt, and prone. After 5 minutes of a selected position, pulmonary functions, including vital capacity (VC), forced expiratory volume in 1 second, maximal inspiratory and expiratory mouth pressures (MIP and MEP, respectively), and breathing pattern components at the chest wall were assessed. Discomfort was assessed using a modified Borg scale. RESULTS: When participants changed position from sitting to each of the 6 recumbent positions, forced expiratory volume in 1 second values decreased significantly (P < .05). None of the participants showed changes in the MIP or MEP in any of the 6 recumbent positions. Rib cage motion was restricted in all recumbent positions except supine, left anteversion at a 45° tilt, and prone. In all 6 recumbent positions, discomfort was experienced during the pulmonary tests. However, in the left retroversion at a 45° tilt position, no discomfort was experienced during the MIP and MEP assessments. CONCLUSION: In young, nonobese, healthy volunteers, recumbent positions caused diminished pulmonary functions and induced feelings of discomfort.