• Jane Cross and Frances Elender.
• School of Allied Health Professions, University of East Anglia, Norwich, Norfolk, UK. j.cross@uea.ac.uk
• Resp Care. 2012 Aug 1; 57 (8): 1263-6.

BackgroundOne of the difficulties in comparing the numerous studies on manual chest therapy (MCT) is the wide variety of techniques used and terms employed to describe the intervention. This lack of consistency in therapeutic approach and the absence of defined tools for evaluation have led to a continued air of skepticism about its true value. This paper presents a treatment protocol used in a large randomized controlled trial examining the efficacy and cost effectiveness of MCT for patients hospitalized with exacerbations of COPD.MethodsConsensus development meetings with key physical therapists were held to identify the essential elements of MCT, address potential areas of ambiguity, and provide a set of clear parameters within which treatment would be based and recorded. This iterative approach resulted in a treatment protocol that combined best clinical practice with the research evidence available to date.ResultsIn the Management of Exacerbations of COPD (MATREX) trial, 658 sessions of MCT were delivered by physical therapists over a 3 year period. A high level of adherence to the treatment protocol was seen for all but one of the protocol elements.ConclusionsWith respect to the essential elements of MCT, the treatment protocol used in the MATREX trial offers sufficient flexibility to the therapist, while being robust enough to maintain clinical trial integrity. The level of adherence by therapists indicates its professional acceptability with respect to delivering and evaluating this therapy.

19 keywords...

hide…