Indian Journal of Physiotherapy & Occupational Therapy-An International Journal

Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access
Open Access Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Restricted Access Subscription Access

Evaluation of effects of Nebulization and Breathing Control in Asthmatic Patients


Affiliations
1 P.T. School and Centre, Seth G.S.M.C. and K.E.M. Hospital, Parel, Mumbai, India
     

   Subscribe/Renew Journal


Background: Asthma is a disease characterized by airflow limitation that is either fully or partially reversible. There is a growing realization that in asthma the airflow limitation leads to further mechanical consequences that result in dyspnea which is also a very important domain along-with airflow limitation to build up strategies to effectively cope up with asthma. To treat asthma effectively means to achieve a better level of control of asthma. Various strategies have been adopted by the patients themselves to keep their asthma level in control and avoid frequent exacerbations. Asthma has many dimensions to it rather than only airway obstruction. Asthma is affected by anxiety, cold, emotional quotient & also by the level to which other non- pharmacological means to control asthma adopted by the patient like yoga, meditation and various breathing strategies. It was seen that pharmacological measures though were very essential to treat asthma, but along-with its long term use; factors like adverse effects of medications, patient's non-compliance, cost effectiveness of treatment, patients sense of satisfaction of their disease control came into focus. Hence, various non-pharmacological measures were researched in the past trials, of which breathing control was one of the measures used.

Purpose: The purpose of our study was to evaluate the effects of nebulization and breathing control (N+B combination) as against only breathing control(B) on airway obstruction [by measuring peak expiratory flow rate(PEFR), forced expiratory volume in 1st second(FEV1) and dyspnea [by measuring respiratory rate (RR) and rate of perceived exertion (RPE)] in asthmatic patients.

Method: In total, 60 patients were selected according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Written informed consent was taken from the patients and asthmatic patients were randomly allocated to two groups either N+B or only B. Parameters PEFR, FEV1, RR and RPE on Borg's modified 10 point category ratio scale were obtained before and after the treatment session. Data was analyzed using SPSS 15. For statistical significance, p value of

Results: There was a statistically significant improvement in PEFR, FEV1, RR and RPE in both the groups. However, there was no statistically significant difference in PEFR and FEV1 i.e. airway obstruction between the two groups. But, there was a statistically significant difference in RR and RPE i.e. dyspnea between the two groups, with breathing control showing greater improvement in dyspnea.

Conclusion: Thus, asthmatic patients not only could reverse their airway obstruction (PEFR, FEV1) with Breathing control but also improved in terms of dyspnea (RR, RPE) as compared for Nebulization and Breathing control group. Nebulization and Breathing control group though it showed statistical significant improvement in airway obstruction(PEFR,FEV1) than only Breathing control; but the overall energy expenditure and thermogenic effect of nebulization with salbutamol did not help reverse dyspnea(RR and RPE)to the effect the breathing control could to.


Keywords

Asthmatics, Nebulization, Breathing Control, Airway Obstruction, Dyspnea
Subscription Login to verify subscription
User
Notifications
Font Size


  • Global Initiative for asthma: global Strategy for Asthma Management and Prevention: GINA 2008 Update. Bethesda, MD: National, Heart, Lung and Blood Institute, National Institutes of Health. Definition and Overview, Diagnosis and classification, pg. 1-23. Available from URL: http:/ /www.ginasthma.org

  • Cristopher A Kellett, Jacqueline A Mullan. Breathing Control Techniques in the Management of Asthma.Volume 88, Issue 12, Pages 751-758 (December 2002).

  • M Thomas, R K McKinley, S Mellor, G Watkin, E Holloway, J Scullion, D E Shaw, A Wardlaw, D Price, I Pavord. Breathing exercises for asthma: a randomised controlled trial .Thorax 2009; 64: 55-61.

  • E. Ernst. Breathing techniques - adjunctive treatment modalities for asthma? A systematic review Eur Respir J 2000; 15: 969-972.

  • Hollway E, Ram FS. Breathing exercises for asthma. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2004; 1):CD001277.

  • Elizabeth A Holloway, Robert J West. Integrated breathing and relaxation training (the Papworth method) for adults in asthma with primary care: a RCT. Thorax 2007; 62: 1039-1042.

  • Cowie RL, Conley DP, Underwood MF. A RCT of the Buteyko technique as an adjunct to conventional management of asthma. Respir Med 2008:726-732.

  • Donna Frownfelter, Elizazbeth Dean. Cardio pulmonary Pathophysiology. In Marjory Frazer, Donna Morrisey editors. Principles and practice of Cardio pulmonary physical therapy; 3rd edition, Mosby Inc; 2006. P. 77,391,420-421.

  • R.B. Cole. Bronchodilator Drugs. In: editors. Respiratory Diseases. 2nd edition. Churchill Livingstone Inc.; 1981:pg. no.190.

  • C A Slader, H K Reddel, L M Spencer, E G Belousova, C L Armour, S Z Bosnic-Anticevich, F C K Thien, C R Jenkins. Double blind randomised controlled trial of two different breathing techniques in the management of asthma Thorax 2006;61: 651-656.

  • Diagnosis of Asthma. Evidence 2.5.2.Peak Expiratory Flow Monitoring. Edinghburgh: SIGN 2009.Available from url:http://www.sign.ac.uk/

  • Usefulness of the modified 0-10 Borg scale in assessing the degree of dyspnea in patients with COPD and asthma Authors: San Diego, California. Karla R. Kendrick, Sunita C. Baxi, Robert M. Smith, Emergency Department and Urgent Care Clinic, Veterans Administration San Diego HealthCare System, San Diego, Calif.

  • P Amoroso, S R Wilson, J Moxham, J Ponte. Acute effects of inhaled salbutamol on the metabolic rate of normal subjects .Thorax 1993;48: 882-885.

  • Lewis LK, Williams MT, Olds T. Short-term effects on outcomes related to the mechanism of intervention and physiological outcomes but insufficient evidence of clinical benefits for breathing control: a systematic review. Aust J Physiother. 2007;53(4):219-227.


Abstract Views: 660

PDF Views: 0




  • Evaluation of effects of Nebulization and Breathing Control in Asthmatic Patients

Abstract Views: 660  |  PDF Views: 0

Authors

Bhakti Kesharia
P.T. School and Centre, Seth G.S.M.C. and K.E.M. Hospital, Parel, Mumbai, India
Amita Mehta
P.T. School and Centre, Seth G.S.M.C. and K.E.M. Hospital, Parel, Mumbai, India

Abstract


Background: Asthma is a disease characterized by airflow limitation that is either fully or partially reversible. There is a growing realization that in asthma the airflow limitation leads to further mechanical consequences that result in dyspnea which is also a very important domain along-with airflow limitation to build up strategies to effectively cope up with asthma. To treat asthma effectively means to achieve a better level of control of asthma. Various strategies have been adopted by the patients themselves to keep their asthma level in control and avoid frequent exacerbations. Asthma has many dimensions to it rather than only airway obstruction. Asthma is affected by anxiety, cold, emotional quotient & also by the level to which other non- pharmacological means to control asthma adopted by the patient like yoga, meditation and various breathing strategies. It was seen that pharmacological measures though were very essential to treat asthma, but along-with its long term use; factors like adverse effects of medications, patient's non-compliance, cost effectiveness of treatment, patients sense of satisfaction of their disease control came into focus. Hence, various non-pharmacological measures were researched in the past trials, of which breathing control was one of the measures used.

Purpose: The purpose of our study was to evaluate the effects of nebulization and breathing control (N+B combination) as against only breathing control(B) on airway obstruction [by measuring peak expiratory flow rate(PEFR), forced expiratory volume in 1st second(FEV1) and dyspnea [by measuring respiratory rate (RR) and rate of perceived exertion (RPE)] in asthmatic patients.

Method: In total, 60 patients were selected according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Written informed consent was taken from the patients and asthmatic patients were randomly allocated to two groups either N+B or only B. Parameters PEFR, FEV1, RR and RPE on Borg's modified 10 point category ratio scale were obtained before and after the treatment session. Data was analyzed using SPSS 15. For statistical significance, p value of

Results: There was a statistically significant improvement in PEFR, FEV1, RR and RPE in both the groups. However, there was no statistically significant difference in PEFR and FEV1 i.e. airway obstruction between the two groups. But, there was a statistically significant difference in RR and RPE i.e. dyspnea between the two groups, with breathing control showing greater improvement in dyspnea.

Conclusion: Thus, asthmatic patients not only could reverse their airway obstruction (PEFR, FEV1) with Breathing control but also improved in terms of dyspnea (RR, RPE) as compared for Nebulization and Breathing control group. Nebulization and Breathing control group though it showed statistical significant improvement in airway obstruction(PEFR,FEV1) than only Breathing control; but the overall energy expenditure and thermogenic effect of nebulization with salbutamol did not help reverse dyspnea(RR and RPE)to the effect the breathing control could to.


Keywords


Asthmatics, Nebulization, Breathing Control, Airway Obstruction, Dyspnea

References