An initial evaluation of the safety of a disposable oscillating positive expiratory pressure device in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a sort-term pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Handheld oscillating positive expiratory pressure (OPEP) devices have been a mainstay of treatment for patients with hypersecretory conditions such as cystic fibrosis (CF) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) since the 1970s. Current devices are reusable and require regular cleaning and disinfection to prevent harbouring potentially pathogenic organisms. Adherence to cleaning regimens for respiratory devices is often poor and in response to this, a prototype disposable OPEP device-the 'UL-OPEP' (University of Limerick-Oscillating Positive Expiratory Pressure device)-was developed to mitigate the risk of contamination by pathogens. The device was previously evaluated successfully in a group of paediatric CF patients. The aim of the current study was to initially evaluate the safety of the prototype in patients with COPD over a period of 1 month to ensure no adverse events, negative impacts on lung function, exercise tolerance, or quality of life. Data on user experience of the device were also collected during post-study follow-up. METHODS: A sample of 50 volunteer participants were recruited from pulmonary rehabilitation clinics within the local hospital network. The patients were clinically stable, productive, and not current or previous users of OPEP devices. Participants were invited to use a prototype disposable OPEP device daily for a period of 1 month. Pre- and post-study lung function was assessed with standard spirometry, and exercise tolerance with the 6-min-walk-test (6MWT). Quality of life was assessed using the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), and user experience of the prototype device evaluated using a post-study questionnaire. RESULTS: 24 Participants completed the study: 9 were female. Overall median age was 67.5 years, range 53-85 years. Lung function, 6-min walk test, and SGRQ scores showed no significant change post-study. User feedback was positive overall. CONCLUSIONS: The results indicate that the UL-OPEP is safe to use in patients with COPD. No adverse events were recorded during the study or in the follow-up period of 2 weeks. The device did not negatively impact patients' lung function, exercise tolerance, or quality of life during short term use (1 month), and usability feedback received was generally positive. Larger, longer duration studies will be required to evaluate efficacy. Registration The study was approved as a Clinical Investigation by the Irish Health Products Regulatory Authority (CRN-2209025-CI0085).

Oscillating devices for airway clearance in people with cystic fibrosis.

BACKGROUND: Chest physiotherapy is widely prescribed to assist the clearance of airway secretions in people with cystic fibrosis. Oscillating devices generate intra- or extra-thoracic oscillations orally or external to the chest wall. Internally they create variable resistances within the airways, generating controlled oscillating positive pressure which mobilises mucus. Extra-thoracic oscillations are generated by forces outside the respiratory system, e.g. high frequency chest wall oscillation. This is an update of a previously published review. OBJECTIVES: To identify whether oscillatory devices, oral or chest wall, are effective for mucociliary clearance and whether they are equivalent or superior to other forms of airway clearance in the successful management of secretions in people with cystic fibrosis. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group Trials Register comprising references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches and hand searches of relevant journals and abstract books of conference proceedings. Latest search of the Cystic Fibrosis Trials Register: 29 July 2019. In addition we searched the trials databases ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. Latest search of trials databases: 15 August 2019. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled studies and controlled clinical studies of oscillating devices compared with any other form of physiotherapy in people with cystic fibrosis. Single-treatment interventions (therapy technique used only once in the comparison) were excluded. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently applied the inclusion criteria to publications, assessed the quality of the included studies and assessed the evidence using GRADE. MAIN RESULTS: The searches identified 82 studies (330 references); 39 studies (total of 1114 participants) met the inclusion criteria. Studies varied in duration from up to one week to one year; 20 of the studies were cross-over in design. The studies also varied in type of intervention and the outcomes measured, data were not published in sufficient detail in most of these studies, so meta-analysis was limited. Few studies were considered to have a low risk of bias in any domain. It is not possible to blind participants and clinicians to physiotherapy interventions, but 13 studies did blind the outcome assessors. The quality of the evidence across all comparisons ranged from low to very low. Forced expiratory volume in one second was the most frequently measured outcome and while many of the studies reported an improvement in those people using a vibrating device compared to before the study, there were few differences when comparing the different devices to each other or to other airway clearance techniques. One study identified an increase in frequency of exacerbations requiring antibiotics whilst using high frequency chest wall oscillation when compared to positive expiratory pressure (low-quality evidence). There were some small but significant changes in secondary outcome variables such as sputum volume or weight, but not wholly in favour of oscillating devices and due to the low- or very low-quality evidence, it is not clear whether these were due to the particular intervention. Participant satisfaction was reported in 13 studies but again with low- or very low-quality evidence and not consistently in favour of an oscillating device, as some participants preferred breathing techniques or techniques used prior to the study interventions. The results for the remaining outcome measures were not examined or reported in sufficient detail to provide any high-level evidence. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There was no clear evidence that oscillation was a more or less effective intervention overall than other forms of physiotherapy; furthermore there was no evidence that one device is superior to another. The findings from one study showing an increase in frequency of exacerbations requiring antibiotics whilst using an oscillating device compared to positive expiratory pressure may have significant resource implications. More adequately-powered long-term randomised controlled trials are necessary and outcomes measured should include frequency of exacerbations, individual preference, adherence to therapy and general satisfaction with treatment. Increased adherence to therapy may then lead to improvements in other parameters, such as exercise tolerance and respiratory function. Additional evidence is needed to evaluate whether oscillating devices combined with other forms of airway clearance is efficacious in people with cystic fibrosis.There may also be a requirement to consider the cost implication of devices over other forms of equally advantageous airway clearance techniques. Using the GRADE method to assess the quality of the evidence, we judged this to be low or very low quality, which suggests that further research is very likely to have an impact on confidence in any estimate of effect generated by future interventions.

The effectiveness of a mobile high-frequency chest wall oscillation (HFCWO) device for airway clearance.

INTRODUCTION: High-frequency chest wall oscillation (HFCWO) is a commonly prescribed airway clearance technique (ACT) for patients whose ability to expectorate sputum is compromised. This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of a newly developed mobile ACT device (mHFCWO-The Monarch Airway Clearance System) in patients with cystic fibrosis (CF). A standard nonmobile HFCWO device (sHFCWO) was used as a comparator. METHODOLOGY: This was a randomized, open-label, crossover pilot study. CF patients were treated with each device. Sputum was collected during and after each therapy session, while spirometry tests, Brody score assessment and functional respiratory imaging were performed before and after treatments. RESULTS: Wet weight of sputum collected during and after treatment was similar for mHFCWO and sHFCWO (6.53 ± 8.55 vs 5.80 ± 5.82; P = .777). Interestingly, the mHFCWO treatment led to a significant decrease in specific airway volume (9.55 ± 9.96 vs 8.74 ± 9.70 mL/L; P < .001), while increasing specific airway resistance (0.10 ± 0.16 vs 0.16 ± 0.23 KPA*S; P < .001). These changes were heterogeneously-distributed throughout the lung tissue and were greater in the distal areas, suggesting a shift of mucus. Changes were accompanied by an overall improvement in the Brody index (57.71 ± 16.55 vs 55.20 ± 16.98; P = .001). CONCLUSION: The newly developed mobile device provides airway clearance for CF patients comparable to a nonmobile sHFCWO device, yielding a change in airway geometry and patency by the shift of mucus from the more peripheral regions to the central airways.

Airway clearance techniques for cystic fibrosis: an overview of Cochrane systematic reviews.

BACKGROUND: Cystic fibrosis is a life-limiting genetic condition in which thick mucus builds up in the lungs, leading to infections, inflammation, and eventually, deterioration in lung function. To clear their lungs of mucus, people with cystic fibrosis perform airway clearance techniques daily. There are various airway clearance techniques, which differ in terms of the need for assistance or equipment, and cost. OBJECTIVES: To summarise the evidence from Cochrane Reviews on the effectiveness and safety of various airway clearance techniques in people with cystic fibrosis. METHODS: For this overview, we included Cochrane Reviews of randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials (including cross-over trials) that evaluated an airway clearance technique (conventional chest physiotherapy, positive expiratory pressure (PEP) therapy, high-pressure PEP therapy, active cycle of breathing techniques, autogenic drainage, airway oscillating devices, external high frequency chest compression devices and exercise) in people with cystic fibrosis.We searched the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews on 29 November 2018.Two review authors independently evaluated reviews for eligibility. One review author extracted data from included reviews and a second author checked the data for accuracy. Two review authors independently graded the quality of reviews using the ROBIS tool. We used the GRADE approach for assessing the overall strength of the evidence for each primary outcome (forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1), individual preference and quality of life). MAIN RESULTS: We included six Cochrane Reviews, one of which compared any type of chest physiotherapy with no chest physiotherapy or coughing alone and the remaining five reviews included head-to-head comparisons of different airway clearance techniques. All the reviews were considered to have a low risk of bias. However, the individual trials included in the reviews often did not report sufficient information to adequately assess risk of bias. Many trials did not sufficiently report on outcome measures and had a high risk of reporting bias.We are unable to draw definitive conclusions for comparisons of airway clearance techniques in terms of FEV1, except for reporting no difference between PEP therapy and oscillating devices after six months of treatment, mean difference -1.43% predicted (95% confidence interval -5.72 to 2.87); the quality of the body of evidence was graded as moderate. The quality of the body of evidence comparing different airway clearance techniques for other outcomes was either low or very low. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is little evidence to support the use of one airway clearance technique over another. People with cystic fibrosis should choose the airway clearance technique that best meets their needs, after considering comfort, convenience, flexibility, practicality, cost, or some other factor. More long-term, high-quality randomised controlled trials comparing airway clearance techniques among people with cystic fibrosis are needed.

Objective Versus Self-Reported Adherence to Airway Clearance Therapy in Cystic Fibrosis.

BACKGROUND: Historically, studies of adherence to airway clearance therapy in cystic fibrosis (CF) have relied on self-reporting. We compared self-reported airway clearance therapy adherence to actual usage data from home high-frequency chest wall compressions (HFCWC) vests and identified factors associated with overestimation of adherence in self-reports. METHODS: Pediatric patients who perform airway clearance therapy with a HFCWC vest were eligible to participate. Objective adherence data were obtained from the HFCWC device, which records cumulative utilization time. Two readings at least 5 weeks apart were collected. Objective adherence was recorded as a ratio of mean-to-prescribed daily use (%). Self-reported adherence data were collected with a caregiver survey at enrollment. Adherence rates were categorized as low (< 35% of prescribed), moderate (36-79% of prescribed), and high (≥ 80% of prescribed). An overestimation was present when self-reported adherence was at least one category higher than objective adherence. RESULTS: In the final sample (N = 110), mean adherence by usage data was 61%. Only 35% of subjects (n = 38) were highly adherent, and 28% (n = 31) were low adherent. In contrast, 65% of subjects (n = 72) reported high adherence and only 8% (n = 9) reported low adherence (P < .001). Nearly half of self-reports (46%) overestimated adherence. In a multiple regression analysis, overestimation was associated with multiple airway clearance therapy locations (odds ratio 7.13, 95% CI 1.16-43.72, P = .034) and prescribed daily use ≥ 60 min (odds ratio 3.85, 95% CI 1.08-13.76, P < .038). Among subjects with prescribed daily airway clearance therapy ≥ 60 min, the odds of overestimating adherence increased 3-fold (odds ratio 3.04, 95% CI 1.17-7.87, P = .02) in a lower-income (< $50,000/y) environment. CONCLUSIONS: Self-reports overestimated actual adherence to airway clearance therapy, and the overestimation increased with treatment occurring in multiple households and prescribed therapy duration. Among participants with prescribed airway clearance therapy ≥ 60 min, overestimation increased with lower income. Objective measures of adherence are needed, particularly for lower-income children and those receiving treatments in multiple locations.

Acute effects of combined exercise and oscillatory positive expiratory pressure therapy on sputum properties and lung diffusing capacity in cystic fibrosis: a randomized, controlled, crossover trial.

BACKGROUND: Regular airway clearance by chest physiotherapy and/or exercise is critical to lung health in cystic fibrosis (CF). Combination of cycling exercise and chest physiotherapy using the Flutter® device on sputum properties has not yet been investigated. METHODS: This prospective, randomized crossover study compared a single bout of continuous cycling exercise at moderate intensity (experiment A, control condition) vs a combination of interval cycling exercise plus Flutter® (experiment B). Sputum properties (viscoelasticity, yield stress, solids content, spinnability, and ease of sputum expectoration), pulmonary diffusing capacity for nitric oxide (DLNO) and carbon monoxide (DLCO) were assessed at rest, directly and 45 min post-exercise (recovery) at 2 consecutive visits. Primary outcome was change in sputum viscoelasticity (G', storage modulus; G", loss modulus) over a broad frequency range (0.1-100 rad.s- 1). RESULTS: 15 adults with CF (FEV1range 24-94% predicted) completed all experiments. No consistent differences between experiments were observed for G' and G" and other sputum properties, except for ease of sputum expectoration during recovery favoring experiment A. DLNO, DLCO, alveolar volume (VA) and pulmonary capillary blood volume (Vcap) increased during experiment A, while DLCO and Vcap increased during experiment B (all P < 0.05). We found no differences in absolute changes in pulmonary diffusing capacity and its components between experiments, except a higher VA immediately post-exercise favoring experiment A (P = 0.032). CONCLUSIONS: The additional use of the Flutter® to moderate intensity interval cycling exercise has no measurable effect on the viscoelastic properties of sputum compared to moderate intensity continuous cycling alone. Elevations in diffusing capacity represent an acute exercise-induced effect not sustained post-exercise. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT02750722 ; URL: clinical.trials.gov; Registration date: April 25th, 2016.

Oscillating devices for airway clearance in people with cystic fibrosis.

BACKGROUND: Chest physiotherapy is widely prescribed to assist the clearance of airway secretions in people with cystic fibrosis. Oscillating devices generate intra- or extra-thoracic oscillations orally or external to the chest wall. Internally they create variable resistances within the airways, generating controlled oscillating positive pressure which mobilises mucus. Extra-thoracic oscillations are generated by forces outside the respiratory system, e.g. high frequency chest wall oscillation. This is an update of a previously published review. OBJECTIVES: To identify whether oscillatory devices, oral or chest wall, are effective for mucociliary clearance and whether they are equivalent or superior to other forms of airway clearance in the successful management of secretions in people with cystic fibrosis. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group Trials Register comprising references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches and hand searches of relevant journals and abstract books of conference proceedings. Latest search of the Cystic Fibrosis Trials Register: 27 April 2017.In addition we searched the trials databases ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. Latest search of trials databases: 26 April 2017. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled studies and controlled clinical studies of oscillating devices compared with any other form of physiotherapy in people with cystic fibrosis. Single-treatment interventions (therapy technique used only once in the comparison) were excluded. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently applied the inclusion criteria to publications and assessed the quality of the included studies. MAIN RESULTS: The searches identified 76 studies (302 references); 35 studies (total of 1138 participants) met the inclusion criteria. Studies varied in duration from up to one week to one year; 20 of the studies were cross-over in design. The studies also varied in type of intervention and the outcomes measured, data were not published in sufficient detail in most of these studies, so meta-analysis was limited. Few studies were considered to have a low risk of bias in any domain. It is not possible to blind participants and clinicians to physiotherapy interventions, but 11 studies did blind the outcome assessors.Forced expiratory volume in one second was the most frequently measured outcome. One long-term study (seven months) compared oscillatory devices with either conventional physiotherapy or breathing techniques and found statistically significant differences in some lung function parameters in favour of oscillating devices. One study identified an increase in frequency of exacerbations requiring antibiotics whilst using high frequency chest wall oscillation when compared to positive expiratory pressure. There were some small but significant changes in secondary outcome variables such as sputum volume or weight, but not wholly in favour of oscillating devices. Participant satisfaction was reported in 15 studies but this was not specifically in favour of an oscillating device, as some participants preferred breathing techniques or techniques used prior to the study interventions. The results for the remaining outcome measures were not examined or reported in sufficient detail to provide any high level evidence. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There was no clear evidence that oscillation was a more or less effective intervention overall than other forms of physiotherapy; furthermore there was no evidence that one device is superior to another. The findings from one study showing an increase in frequency of exacerbations requiring antibiotics whilst using an oscillating device compared to positive expiratory pressure may have significant resource implications. More adequately-powered long-term randomised controlled trials are necessary and outcomes measured should include frequency of exacerbations, individual preference, adherence to therapy and general satisfaction with treatment. Increased adherence to therapy may then lead to improvements in other parameters, such as exercise tolerance and respiratory function. Additional evidence is needed to evaluate whether oscillating devices combined with other forms of airway clearance is efficacious in people with cystic fibrosis.There may also be a requirement to consider the cost implication of devices over other forms of equally advantageous airway clearance techniques. Using the GRADE method to assess the quality of the evidence, we judged this to be low or very low quality, which suggests that further research is very likely to have an impact on confidence in any estimate of effect generated by future interventions.

Evaluation of Functional Characteristics of 4 Oscillatory Positive Pressure Devices in a Simulated Cystic Fibrosis Model.

BACKGROUND: Oscillatory positive expiratory pressure (OPEP) is an airway clearance therapy that delivers positive pressure and air-flow oscillations during exhalation. This study described functional characteristic differences of 4 OPEP devices during an active exhalation in a simulated model. We hypothesized peak pressure (Ppeak), positive expiratory pressure (PEP), oscillatory frequency (f), and pressure amplitude will differ, depending upon the device used, device resistance setting, and time (repeated consecutive active exhalations through the device). METHODS: The ASL 5000 was scripted to simulate pulmonary mechanics of a pediatric cystic fibrosis patient with moderate to severe lung disease. Airway resistance was standardized at 17.1 cm H2O/L/s, pulmonary compliance at 42.1 mL/cm H2O, active exhalation at 22 breaths/min, and tidal volume at 409 mL. Resistance settings for the Acapella, RC-Cornet, Flutter, and Aerobika were adjusted to low, medium, and high. Values for f, Ppeak, PEP, and pressure amplitude were recorded for 1 min and graphically displayed. RESULTS: Significant effects for time, device, and resistance (P < .01) were noted for Ppeak, PEP, and pressure amplitude at each resistance level, demonstrating that the devices functioned differently as more than one repetition of a series of consecutive active exhalations are performed. Significant interaction effects for device, resistance level, and time indicate inconsistent output for Ppeak (P < .01), PEP (P < .01), and pressure amplitude (P < .01). Oscillatory f values fell within the respective manufacturers' operational parameters. The Aerobika provided the most consistent pressure amplitude across resistance settings and produced the highest mean pressure amplitude at medium and high resistance settings. CONCLUSIONS: Statistically significant and clinically relevant variations in Ppeak, PEP, and pressure amplitude occurred between devices and within a device, as the resistance setting changed. The combination of device, time, and resistance settings affects OPEP device output for pressure, amplitude, and oscillatory frequency. Functional variations may impact therapeutic effectiveness, warranting additional study to determine clinical impact.

Airway clearance techniques for bronchiectasis.

BACKGROUND: People with non-cystic fibrosis bronchiectasis commonly experience chronic cough and sputum production, features that may be associated with progressive decline in clinical and functional status. Airway clearance techniques (ACTs) are often prescribed to facilitate expectoration of sputum from the lungs, but the efficacy of these techniques in a stable clinical state or during an acute exacerbation of bronchiectasis is unclear. OBJECTIVES: Primary: to determine effects of ACTs on rates of acute exacerbation, incidence of hospitalisation and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in individuals with acute and stable bronchiectasis. Secondary: to determine whether:• ACTs are safe for individuals with acute and stable bronchiectasis; and• ACTs have beneficial effects on physiology and symptoms in individuals with acute and stable bronchiectasis. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials from inception to November 2015 and PEDro in March 2015, and we handsearched relevant journals. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled parallel and cross-over trials that compared an ACT versus no treatment, sham ACT or directed coughing in participants with bronchiectasis. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures as expected by The Cochrane Collaboration. MAIN RESULTS: Seven studies involving 105 participants met the inclusion criteria of this review, six of which were cross-over in design. Six studies included adults with stable bronchiectasis; the other study examined clinically stable children with bronchiectasis. Three studies provided single treatment sessions, two lasted 15 to 21 days and two were longer-term studies. Interventions varied; some control groups received a sham intervention and others were inactive. The methodological quality of these studies was variable, with most studies failing to use concealed allocation for group assignment and with absence of blinding of participants and personnel for outcome measure assessment. Heterogeneity between studies precluded inclusion of these data in the meta-analysis; the review is therefore narrative.One study including 20 adults that compared an airway oscillatory device versus no treatment found no significant difference in the number of exacerbations at 12 weeks (low-quality evidence). Data were not available for assessment of the impact of ACTs on time to exacerbation, duration or incidence of hospitalisation or total number of hospitalised days. The same study reported clinically significant improvements in HRQoL on both disease-specific and cough-related measures. The median difference in the change in total St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) score over three months in this study was 7.5 units (P value = 0.005 (Wilcoxon)). Treatment consisting of high-frequency chest wall oscillation (HFCWO) or a mix of ACTs prescribed for 15 days significantly improved HRQoL when compared with no treatment (low-quality evidence). Two studies reported mean increases in sputum expectoration with airway oscillatory devices in the short term of 8.4 mL (95% confidence interval (CI) 3.4 to 13.4 mL) and in the long term of 3 mL (P value = 0.02). HFCWO improved forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) by 156 mL and forced vital capacity (FVC) by 229.1 mL when applied for 15 days, but other types of ACTs showed no effect on dynamic lung volumes. Two studies reported a reduction in pulmonary hyperinflation among adults with non-positive expiratory pressure (PEP) ACTs (difference in functional residual capacity (FRC) of 19%, P value < 0.05; difference in total lung capacity (TLC) of 703 mL, P value = 0.02) and with airway oscillatory devices (difference in FRC of 30%, P value < 0.05) compared with no ACTs. Low-quality evidence suggests that ACTs (HFCWO, airway oscillatory devices or a mix of ACTs) reduce symptoms of breathlessness and cough and improve ease of sputum expectoration compared with no treatment (P value < 0.05). ACTs had no effect on gas exchange, and no studies reported effects of antibiotic usage. Among studies exploring airway oscillating devices, investigators reported no adverse events. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: ACTs appear to be safe for individuals (adults and children) with stable bronchiectasis and may account for improvements in sputum expectoration, selected measures of lung function, symptoms and HRQoL. The role of these techniques in acute exacerbation of bronchiectasis is unknown. In view of the chronic nature of bronchiectasis, additional data are needed to establish the short-term and long-term clinical value of ACTs for patient-important outcomes and for long-term clinical parameters that impact disease progression in individuals with stable bronchiectasis, allowing further guidance on prescription of specific ACTs for people with bronchiectasis.

Mechanical chest compression with a medical parallel manipulator for cardiopulmonary resuscitation.

BACKGROUND: Chest compression is the primary technique in emergency situations for resuscitating patients who have a cardiac arrest. Even for experienced personnel, it is difficult to perform chest compressions at the correct compression rate and depth. METHODS: We describe a new translational three-revolute-revolute-revolute (3-RRR) parallel manipulator designed for delivering chest compressions. The kinematic and chest analyses have been carried out analytically. The motion of the parallel manipulator while performing chest compressions was simulated under experimental conditions and the results were verified in MSC ADAMS software. RESULTS: Simulation and experimental results had more or less similar results. The proposed parallel manipulator was able to achieve 120 compressions/min (cpm) with a depth in the range 38-51 mm during cardio-pulmonary resuscitation (CPR). CONCLUSIONS: The design of the manipulator makes it easy to deploy for performing chest compressions at the correct compression rate and depth, as outlined in the 2010 resuscitation guidelines.

Oscillating devices for airway clearance in people with cystic fibrosis.

BACKGROUND: Chest physiotherapy is widely prescribed to assist the clearance of airway secretions in people with cystic fibrosis. Oscillating devices generate intra- or extra-thoracic oscillations orally or external to the chest wall. Internally they create variable resistances within the airways, generating controlled oscillating positive pressure which mobilises mucus. Extra-thoracic oscillations are generated by forces outside the respiratory system, e.g. high frequency chest wall oscillation. OBJECTIVES: To identify whether oscillatory devices, oral or chest wall, are effective for mucociliary clearance and whether they are equivalent or superior to other forms of airway clearance in the successful management of secretions in people with cystic fibrosis. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group Trials Register comprising references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches and hand searches of relevant journals and abstract books of conference proceedings. Latest search of the Cystic Fibrosis Trials Register: 13 January 2014. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled studies and controlled clinical studies of oscillating devices compared with any other form of physiotherapy in people with cystic fibrosis. Single-treatment interventions (therapy technique used only once in the comparison) were excluded. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently applied the inclusion criteria to publications and assessed the quality of the included studies. MAIN RESULTS: The searches identified 68 studies with a total of 288 references; 35 studies (total of 1050 participants) met the inclusion criteria. Studies varied in duration from up to one week to one year; 20 of the studies were cross-over in design. The studies also varied in type of intervention and the outcomes measured, furthermore data were not published in sufficient detail in most of these studies, so meta-analysis was limited. Few studies were considered to have a low risk of bias in any domain. It is not possible to blind participants and clinicians to physiotherapy interventions, but 10 studies did blind the outcome assessors.Forced expiratory volume in one second was the most frequently measured outcome. One long-term study (seven months) compared oscillatory devices with either conventional physiotherapy or breathing techniques and found statistically significant differences in some lung function parameters in favour of oscillating devices. One study identified an increase in frequency of exacerbations requiring antibiotics whilst using high frequency chest wall oscillation when compared to positive expiratory pressure. There were some small but significant changes in secondary outcome variables such as sputum volume or weight, but not wholly in favour of oscillating devices. Participant satisfaction was reported in 15 studies but this was not specifically in favour of an oscillating device, as some participants preferred breathing techniques or techniques used prior to the study interventions. The results for the remaining outcome measures were not examined or reported in sufficient detail to provide any high level evidence. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There was no clear evidence that oscillation was a more or less effective intervention overall than other forms of physiotherapy; furthermore there was no evidence that one device is superior to another. The findings from one study showing an increase in frequency of exacerbations requiring antibiotics whilst using an oscillating device compared to positive expiratory pressure may have significant resource implications. More adequately-powered long-term randomised controlled trials are necessary and outcomes measured should include frequency of exacerbations, patient preference, adherence to therapy and general satisfaction with treatment. Increased adherence to therapy may then lead to improvements in other parameters, such as exercise tolerance and respiratory function. Additional evidence is needed to evaluate whether oscillating devices combined with other forms of airway clearance is efficacious in people with cystic fibrosis.

Airway clearance techniques for bronchiectasis.

BACKGROUND: People with non-cystic fibrosis bronchiectasis commonly experience chronic cough and sputum production and these features may be associated with progressive decline in clinical status. Airway clearance techniques (ACTs) are often prescribed to facilitate expectoration of sputum from the lungs, but the efficacy of these techniques in a stable clinical state or during an acute exacerbation of bronchiectasis is unclear. OBJECTIVES: Primary: to determine the effects of ACTs on the rate of acute exacerbations, incidence of hospitalisation and health-related quality of life in individuals with acute and stable bronchiectasis.Secondary: to determine whether a) ACTs are safe for individuals with acute and stable bronchiectasis and b) ACTs have beneficial effects on physiology and symptoms in individuals with acute and stable bronchiectasis. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials from inception to October 2012, PEDro in October 2012 and handsearched relevant journals. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled parallel and cross-over trials that compared an ACT to no treatment, sham ACT or directed coughing in participants with bronchiectasis. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration. MAIN RESULTS: Five studies involving 51 participants met the inclusion criteria of the review, all of which were cross-over design. Four studies were on adults with stable bronchiectasis, and the other study was on clinically stable children with bronchiectasis. Three studies were single treatment sessions, two were longer-term studies. The interventions varied and some control groups received a sham intervention while others were inactive. The methodological quality of the studies was variable and the studies were not able to blind participants and personal. Heterogeneity between studies precluded these data from meta-analysis and the review was therefore narrative.One study on 20 adults comparing an airway oscillatory device with no treatment found no significant difference in the number of exacerbations at 12 weeks (low-quality evidence). No data were available to assess the impact of ACTs on the time to exacerbation, duration of, incidence of hospitalisation or total number of hospitalised days. The same study reported clinically significant improvements in health-related quality of life in both disease-specific and cough-related measures. While based on a small number of participants and the data were skewed, the median difference in the change in total St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) score over three months in this study was 8.5 units (P value = 0.005 (Wilcoxon), low-quality evidence). Two studies reported mean increases in volume of sputum expectorated with airway oscillatory devices in the short term of 8.4 mL (95% CI 3.4 to 13.4 mL) and in the long term of 3 mL (P value = 0.02), with no significant effect on lung function. One study reported an immediate reduction in pulmonary hyperinflation in adults with non-positive expiratory pressure (PEP) ACTs (difference in functional residual capacity (FRC) of 19%, P value < 0.05) and with airway oscillatory devices (difference in FRC of 30%, P value < 0.05) compared to no ACTs. A similar decrease in pulmonary hyperinflation (difference in FRC of 6%) was found in children using an airway oscillatory device for 3 months compared to sham therapy. No studies reported on the effects of gas exchange, people's symptoms or antibiotic usage. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: ACTs appear to be safe for individuals (adults and children) with stable bronchiectasis, where there may be improvements in sputum expectoration, selected measures of lung function and health-related quality of life. The role of these techniques in people with an acute exacerbation of bronchiectasis is unknown. In view of the chronic nature of bronchiectasis, more data are needed to establish the clinical value of ACTs over the short and long term on patient-important outcomes, including symptoms, on physiological outcomes which may clarify the rationale for each technique and on long-term parameters that impact on disease progression in individuals with stable bronchiectasis. This is necessary in order to provide further guidance of specific ACT prescription for people with bronchiectasis. It may also be important to establish the comparative effect of different types of ACTs in people with bronchiectasis.

The effect of design on the usability and real world effectiveness of medical devices: a case study with adolescent users.

Adolescents are currently overlooked in many fields of healthcare research and as a result are often required to use medical devices that have been designed for use by either children or adults. This can lead to poor adherence and a reduction in health outcomes. This study examines the role of device design in the real-world effectiveness of a medical device used in the treatment of cystic fibrosis from the perspective of adolescent users. Interactive design interviews were carried out with 20 adolescent users of the acapella(®) physiotherapy device to investigate user requirements and themes about the user-device relationship that are important to this user group. This study found that adolescent users of the acapella(®) device do not use the device as regularly and correctly as is recommended by clinicians. A number of aspects of the current design of the acapella(®) device were identified that affect how and how often it is used. Five factors are identified that may improve the real world effectiveness of the acapella(®) device for adolescents with Cystic Fibrosis: engagement, information, confidence, aesthetics and compatibility with lifestyle.

The influence of Flutter®VRP1 components on mucus transport of patients with bronchiectasis.

BACKGROUND: The Flutter(®)VRP1 combines high frequency oscillation and positive expiratory pressure (PEP). OBJECTIVE: To separately evaluate the effect of the Flutter(®)VRP1 components (high frequency oscillation and PEP) on mucus transportability in patients with bronchiectasis. METHODS: Eighteen patients with bronchiectasis received sessions with the Flutter(®)VRP1 or PEP for 30 min daily in a randomized, crossover study. The treatment duration was four weeks with one of the therapies, one week of a "wash-out" period and followed by four more weeks with the other treatment. Weekly secretion samples were collected and evaluated for mucociliary relative transport velocity (RTV), displacement in a simulated cough machine (SCM) and contact angle measurement (CAM). For the proposed comparisons, a linear regression model was used with mixed effects with a significance level of 5%. RESULTS: The Flutter(®)VRP1 treatment resulted in greater displacement in SCM and lower CAM when comparing results from the first (9.6 ± 3.4 cm and 29.4 ± 5.7°, respectively) and fourth weeks of treatment (12.44 ± 10.5 cm and 23.28 ± 6.2°, respectively; p < 0.05). There was no significant difference in the RTV between the treatment weeks for either the Flutter(®)VRP1 or PEP. CONCLUSION: The use of the Flutter(®)VRP1 for four weeks is capable of altering the respiratory secretion transport properties, and this alteration is related to the high frequency oscillation component.

Direct versus video laryngoscopic intubation by novice prehospital intubators with and without chest compressions: A pilot manikin study.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate whether chest compressions affect the time taken for intubation (TTI) using the Macintosh laryngoscope and two portable video laryngoscopes (VLs) (GlideScope Ranger and Airway Scope) when used by novice prehospital caregivers, and to compare the TTIs and rates of successful intubation among the three laryngoscopes with and without chest compressions in a manikin model. METHODS: This was a pilot randomized crossover study. Twenty paramedic students and paramedics who had no clinical experience with tracheal intubation and had never used any of two VLs participated in the study. After a one-hour training session for the VLs, participants performed intubations on a Laerdal Resusci Anne Simulator placed on the floor. Each paramedic used all three laryngoscopes, with the order of usage being randomly assigned. The TTIs and rates of successful intubation among the three laryngoscopes, with and without ongoing chest compressions, were compared. RESULTS: The difference between the TTIs using each laryngoscope with and without chest compressions was not significant (Macintosh: 2.99 sec, p = 0.06; GlideScope Ranger: 2.04 sec, p = 0.11; and Airway Scope: 0.91 sec, p = 0.10). The median TTI using the Airway Scope (15.46 sec) was significantly shorter than those for the Macintosh (24.14 sec) and the GlideScope Ranger (24.12 sec) during chest compressions (p = 0.028 and p = 0.004, respectively). There were no significant differences in the rates of successful intubation among the three laryngoscopes on each condition (without chest compressions, p = 0.15; with chest compressions, p = 0.27), but the cumulative success rates related to the TTI were significantly greater with the Airway Scope than with the other devices in both conditions. CONCLUSION: In this pilot study, chest compressions did not significantly affect the TTI using the Macintosh laryngoscope and two portable VLs when used by novice prehospital caregivers in the manikin model on the floor. Considering the fairly short training time, two portable VLs may be potentially useful adjuncts for tracheal intubation during chest compressions for novice prehospital caregivers. Further studies are required to validate whether these findings are clinically relevant.

Comparison of settings used for high-frequency chest-wall compression in cystic fibrosis.

BACKGROUND: Cystic fibrosis (CF) patients commonly use a high-frequency chest-wall compression (HFCWC) device for airway clearance that generates oscillatory flow with a sine-wave configuration. Typical HFCWC settings combine a lower Vest inflation pressure setting (eg, 5 on the Vest's arbitrary 1-10 scale for the setting that controls the background pressure of the inflatable vest) with mid-range frequency (14-16 Hz) (lower-pressure/mid-frequency HFCWC). OBJECTIVE: To determine whether HFCWC with higher pressure settings (6-10 on the Hill-Rom Vest's arbitrary 1-10 scale) combined with variable mid-frequencies (8, 9, and 10 Hz, plus 18, 19, and 20 Hz) (higher-pressure/variable-frequency HFCWC) results in greater sputum expectoration than lower-pressure/mid-frequency HFCWC. METHODS: This was a controlled randomized crossover study. Sixteen clinically stable, adult CF patients participated. Patients performed airway clearance with HFCWC, once each with lower-pressure/mid-frequency HFCWC and higher-pressure/variable-frequency HFCWC, on separate occasions. All sputum produced during each session was collected. Patients completed pulmonary function tests before and after each session. RESULTS: Median sputum wet weight was greater with higher-pressure/variable-frequency HFCWC than with lower-pressure/mid-frequency HFCWC (6.4 g, range 0.49-22.0 g, versus 4.8 g, range 0.24-15.0 g, P = .02). Dry sputum weight differences did not reach statistical significance (higher-pressure/variable-frequency HFCWC 0.20 g, range 0.009-0.62 g, lower-pressure/mid-frequency HFCWC 0.12 g, range 0.0001-1.0 g, P = .23). Higher-pressure/variable-frequency HFCWC and lower-pressure/mid-frequency HFCWC resulted in similar increases in FEV(1) (70 mL vs 90 mL, P = .21) and forced vital capacity (80 mL vs 80 mL, P = .94). Post-therapy sputum viscoelastic properties did not differ. Patients perceived the 2 regimens as equally comfortable and effective (P = .35 and P = .35, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: In adult CF patients, single-session higher-pressure/variable-frequency HFCWC resulted in greater sputum expectoration by wet weight, but not other differences, compared to the commonly used lower-pressure/mid-frequency settings. Longer-term comparisons are needed in a larger, more diverse population to determine whether sustained use of the higher-pressure/variable-frequency settings results in clinically important differences in outcomes.