| Literature DB >> 35628070 |
Toshiya Tsukamoto1, Michitaka Kato1, Yasunari Kurita1, Masaki Uchida1, Akira Kubo2, Hitoshi Maruyama3.
Abstract
This study aimed to evaluate the effects of expiratory muscle training (EMT) on respiratory muscle strength and respiratory distress during inspiratory load. Thirty-one healthy adult males were randomly divided into an EMT group who underwent EMT (n = 15) and a control group who did not undergo EMT (n = 16). The EMT group underwent EMT with a 50% load of maximum expiratory mouth pressure (PEmax) for 15 min, twice a day, every day, for 4 weeks. The parameter of respiratory muscle fatigue was a decrease in maximum inspiratory mouth pressure (PImax) and PEmax during 20 min of inspiratory load; thus, PImax and PEmax during inspiratory load were measured. Respiratory distress during inspiratory load was assessed using the Borg scale. These assessments were performed on the same subjects in each group before and after the 4 week study. In the EMT group, the PEmax values after the study were significantly higher than those before the study (p < 0.01). Furthermore, before the study, the PImax and PEmax values for the EMT group during inspiratory load were significantly lower than those before inspiratory load (p < 0.01). However, after the study, there was no difference in these values between during and before inspiratory load. In the EMT group, the Borg scale value during inspiratory load from 6 to 20 min was significantly lower after the study than before the study (p < 0.05). EMT increases expiratory muscle strength, thereby attenuating decreased respiratory muscle strength (PImax and PEmax) and respiratory distress during inspiratory load in healthy subjects.Entities:
Keywords: expiratory muscle training; maximum expiratory mouth pressure; maximum inspiratory mouth pressure; respiratory muscle fatigue
Year: 2022 PMID: 35628070 PMCID: PMC9141236 DOI: 10.3390/healthcare10050933
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Healthcare (Basel) ISSN: 2227-9032
Figure 1Procedure for inspiratory load and assessment of respiratory muscle fatigue. Borg scale, modified Borg scale; EMT, expiratory muscle training group; NC, normal control group; PImax, maximum inspiratory mouth pressure; PEmax, maximum expiratory mouth pressure.
Figure 2The CONSORT flow diagram.
Effects of EMT on subject characteristics, respiratory function, and respiratory muscle strength.
| EMT | NC | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Before the Study | After the Study | Before the Study | After the Study | |
| Male sex, | 15 (100) | - | 16 (100) | - |
| Age, years | 27.3 ± 2.4 | - | 26.7 ± 5.1 | - |
| Height, cm | 173.2 ± 5.0 | - | 170.5 ± 5.4 | - |
| Body weight, kg | 64.8 ± 7.4 | 64.5 ± 7.3 | 67.0 ± 7.0 | 66.6 ± 6.9 |
| Body mass index, kg/m2 | 21.5 ± 1.5 | 21.5 ± 1.8 | 23.1 ± 2.1 | 22.9 ± 2.1 |
| Respiratory function | ||||
| FVC, L | 4.5 ± 0.5 | 4.6 ± 0.6 | 4.4 ± 0.4 | 4.4 ± 0.4 |
| %FVC, % | 106.3 ± 10.7 | 107.3 ± 11.6 | 104.5 ± 9.8 | 104.6 ± 10.3 |
| FEV1.0, L | 4.0 ± 0.4 | 4.0 ± 0.4 | 3.8 ± 0.4 | 3.8 ± 0.4 |
| FEV1.0%, % | 88.2 ± 5.9 | 87.8 ± 6.2 | 87.1 ± 4.2 | 86.7 ± 3.7 |
| PEF, L/s | 9.5 ± 1.1 | 10.2 ± 1.1 * | 9.8 ± 1.1 | 9.6 ± 0.9 |
| Respiratory muscle strength | ||||
| PImax, cmH2O | 118.8 ± 16.8 | 127.1 ± 19.7 | 108.4 ± 17.3 | 112.1 ± 22.1 |
| PEmax, cmH2O | 108.0 ± 23.7 | 130.1 ± 28.6 ** | 98.1 ± 14.8 | 95.3 ± 14.5 |
EMT, expiratory muscle training group; NC, normal control group; FVC, forced vital capacity; %FVC, percentage forced vital capacity; FEV1.0, forced expiratory volume in one second; FEV1.0%, forced expiratory volume % in one second; PEF, peak expiratory flow; PImax, maximum inspiratory mouth pressure; PEmax, maximum expiratory mouth pressure. Mean ± standard deviation, compared with before the study within each group, * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01.
Figure 3Chronological changes in PImax and PEmax (EMT group). (a). Chronological changes in PImax (EMT group). (b). Chronological changes in PEmax (EMT group). EMT group: expiratory muscle training group; PImax: maximum inspiratory mouth pressure; PEmax: maximum expiratory mouth pressure. Unit, cmH2O, mean ± standard deviation. Compared with pre-load within group, * p < 0.05 and ** p < 0.01; compared with after-load within group (20 min), ‡ p < 0.01.
Figure 4Chronological changes in PImax and PEmax (NC group). (a). Chronological changes in PImax (NC group). (b). Chronological changes in PEmax (NC group). NC group: normal control group; PImax: maximum inspiratory mouth pressure; PEmax: maximum expiratory mouth pressure. Unit, cmH2O, mean ± standard deviation. Compared with pre-load within group, * p < 0.05 and ** p < 0.01; compared with after-load within group (20 min), † p < 0.05, ‡ p < 0.01.
Figure 5Chronological changes in the Borg scale. (a). Chronological changes in the Borg scale (EMT group). (b). Chronological changes in the Borg scale (NC group). Borg scale: modified Borg scale; EMT group: expiratory muscle training group; NC group: normal control group; Be: before the study; Af: after the study. Compared with before the study within each group, * p < 0.05 and ** p < 0.01. N.S.: not significant.