| Title: |
Comparative analysis of pulmonary ventilation distribution between low-cost and branded incentive spirometers using electrical impedance tomography in healthy adults: Study protocol. |
| Authors: |
Mera, Noraelena1 (AUTHOR), Wilches Luna, Esther Cecilia1 (AUTHOR), Benavides-Cordoba, Vicente1 (AUTHOR) vicente.benavides@correounivalle.edu.co |
| Source: |
PLoS ONE. 5/6/2024, Vol. 19 Issue 5, p1-10. 10p. |
| Subject Terms: |
*ELECTRICAL impedance tomography, *LUNG volume, *SPIROMETRY equipment, *VENTILATION, *RESEARCH protocols, *ADULTS, *COMPARATIVE studies |
| Abstract: |
Background: The Incentive Spirometer (IS) increases lung volume and improves gas exchange by visually stimulating patients to take slow, deep breaths. It prevents respiratory complications and treats postoperative atelectasis in patients undergoing abdominal, thoracic, and neurosurgical procedures. Its effectiveness has been validated in studies that support improved lung capacities and volumes in individuals with respiratory complications, postoperative thoracic surgery, upper abdominal surgery, and bariatric surgery. The modified Pachón incentive spirometer (MPIS) is a cost-effective alternative to branded IS. It is crucial to validate whether the MPIS distributes ventilation as effectively as commercial devices do. Ventilation distribution will be measured using electrical impedance tomography. Objective: The aim is to compare the distribution of pulmonary ventilation between the MPIS and another commercial IS in healthy adults using electrical impedance tomography. Methods: A crossover clinical trial is proposed to evaluate the measurement of pulmonary ventilation distribution using EIT in a sample of healthy adults. All participants will use a commercial flow IS and the MPIS, with the order of assignment randomized. This research will use electrical impedance tomography to validate the operation of the MPIS. Conclusions: This study protocol will compare two incentive spirometers' impact on pulmonary ventilation, potentially endorsing the adoption of a cost-effective device to enhance accessibility for targeted populations. Trial registration: The study was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (NTC05532748). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|
Copyright of PLoS ONE is the property of Public Library of Science and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) |
| Database: |
Academic Search Complete |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests. |
Login for full access.
|
