Maximal Respiratory Pressure Reference Equations in Healthy Adults and Cut-off Points for Defining Respiratory Muscle Weakness.

INTRODUCTION: Maximal inspiratory and expiratory pressures (PImax/PEmax) reference equations obtained in healthy people are needed to correctly interpret respiratory muscle strength. Currently, no clear cut-off points defining respiratory muscle weakness are available. We aimed to establish sex-specific reference equations for PImax/PEmax in a large sample of healthy adults and to objectively determine cut-off points for respiratory muscle weakness. METHODS: A multicentre cross-sectional study was conducted across 14 Spanish centres. Healthy non-smoking volunteers aged 18-80 years stratified by sex and age were recruited. PImax/PEmax were assessed using uniform methodology according to international standards. Multiple linear regressions were used to obtain reference equations. Cut-off points for respiratory muscle weakness were established by using T-scores. RESULTS: The final sample consisted of 610 subjects (314 females; 48 [standard deviation, SD: 17] years). Reference equations for PImax/PEmax included body mass index and a squared term of the age as independent variables for both sexes (p<0.01). Cut-off points for respiratory muscle weakness based on T-scores ≥2.5 SD below the peak mean value achieved at a young age were: 62 and 83cmH2O for PImax and 81 and 109cmH2O for PEmax in females and males, respectively. CONCLUSION: These reference values, based on the largest dataset collected in a European population to date using uniform methodology, help identify cut-off points for respiratory muscle weakness in females and males. These data will help to better identify the presence of respiratory muscle weakness and to determine indications for interventions to improve respiratory muscle function.

Intensive complex physical therapy combined with intermittent pneumatic compression versus Kinesio taping for treating breast cancer-related lymphedema of the upper limb: A randomised cross-over clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to compare the effectiveness of complex physical therapy combined with intermittent pneumatic compression (CPT + IPC) versus Kinesio taping (KT) for breast cancer-related lymphedema. METHODS: A cross-over clinical trial was conducted in 43 women with lymphedema. All participants received two interventions: CPT + IPC and KT, both lasting 3 weeks and a washout period. The main outcome variable was the relative volume change (RVC). The secondary variables were Satisfaction Questionnaire about Textile Therapeutic Devices used for Breast Cancer-Related Lymphedema, Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaire, motion range of upper limb and lymphedema-related symptoms. RESULTS: The RVC reduction was greater with CPT + IPC (-2.2%, SD = 4.7) versus KT (-0.9%, SD = 1.7) (P = 0.002). KT was more satisfactory than multilayer bandaging (8.9 points difference, P < 0.001) and improved DASH score more than CPT + IPC (14.3 points difference, P = 0.002). Regarding motion ranges, only shoulder movements showed significant improvement with CPT + IPC compared with KT (differences between 5.6° and 11.4°). Of the symptoms assessed, only pain reduction showed a significant improvement with KT versus CPT + IPC (0.5 points, P = 0.035). CONCLUSIONS: CPT + IPC achieved higher RVC and greater improvement in th shoulder motion range than KT. Conversely, KT was more satisfactory than multilayer bandaging, obtained better DASH scores and relieved pain more than CPT + IPC. CLINICAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrial registration number: NCT03051750 (date of registration 14 February 2017).

Development and Evaluation of a Satisfaction Questionnaire About Therapeutic Textile Devices Used for Breast Cancer-Related Lymphedema.

Background: There is a need for an appropriate instrument to measure the satisfaction of patients about therapeutic textile devices used for breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL). Methods and Results: A new satisfaction questionnaire about therapeutic textile devices used for BCRL was developed and psychometrically tested. An approach to criterion validity by contrast of hypothesis was made. Different average scores were expected depending on the type of therapeutic textile device: Kinesio taping, compression garment, and multilayer low-stretch bandage. Items were analyzed in nine phases: apparent validity, missing responses, internal consistency, factor analysis, reproducibility, confirmation of factor analysis, contrast of hypothesis, variability, and time for completion. One hundred fifty women were sampled in a consecutive order. A final questionnaire was drafted that fulfilled the validation hypothesis, including 20 items that explored 4 dimensions: mood, patient comfort, patient compliance, and perceived benefits. The total Cronbach's α was 0.87. The intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.93 for test-retest and 0.91 for inter-rater. Neither ceiling nor floor effects were observed. The average burden for the respondent and interviewer was 5.6 (standard deviation [SD] = 3.8) and 2.2 (SD = 1.3) minutes, respectively. Conclusion: This preliminary analysis supports the content validity, reliability, and validity of construct of the questionnaire.

Kinesio taping versus compression garments for treating breast cancer-related lymphedema: a randomized, cross-over, controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effectiveness of Kinesio taping compared to compression garments during maintenance phase of complex decongestive therapy for breast cancer-related lymphedema. DESIGN: Randomized, cross-over, controlled trial. SETTING: Outpatient tertiary-level hospital rehabilitation setting. SUBJECTS: Randomized sample of 30 women with breast cancer-related lymphedema. INTERVENTIONS: Participants received two interventions, Kinesio taping and compression garment, both lasting four weeks, whose order was randomized by blocks. A four-week washout period was established prior to the interventions and between them. MEASUREMENTS: The main outcome was the lymphedema Relative Volume Change. Secondary outcomes were range of motion of arm joints, self-perception of comfort, and lymphedema-related symptoms (pain, tightness, heaviness, and hardness). RESULTS: The decrease in the Relative Volume Change was greater in the Kinesio taping intervention (-5.7%, SD = 2.0) compared to that observed using compression garments (-3.4%, SD = 2.9) (P < 0.001). The range of motion of five upper-limb movements increased after applying taping (between 5.8° and 16.7°) (P < 0.05), but not after compression (P > 0.05). In addition, taping was perceived as more comfortable by patients (between 2.4 and 3 points better than compression in four questions with a 5-point scale (P < 0.001)) and further reduced lymphedema-related symptoms compared to compression (between 0.96 and 1.40 points better in four questions with a 6-point scale (P < 0.05)). CONCLUSION: Kinesio taping was more effective than compression garments for reducing the lymphedema volume, with less severe lymphedema-related symptoms, better improvement of upper-limb mobility, and more comfort.