• Cochrane Db Syst Rev · Jul 2013

    Review Meta Analysis

    Respiratory muscle training for cervical spinal cord injury.

    • David J Berlowitz and Jeanette Tamplin.
    • Institute for Breathing and Sleep, Austin Health, Heidelberg, Australia. david.berlowitz@austin.org.au.
    • Cochrane Db Syst Rev. 2013 Jul 23; 2013 (7): CD008507CD008507.

    BackgroundCervical spinal cord injury (SCI) severely comprises respiratory function due to paralysis and impairment of the respiratory muscles. Various types of respiratory muscle training (RMT) to improve respiratory function for people with cervical SCI have been described in the literature. A systematic review of this literature is needed to determine the effectiveness of RMT (either inspiratory or expiratory muscle training) on pulmonary function, dyspnoea, respiratory complications, respiratory muscle strength, and quality of life for people with cervical SCI.ObjectivesTo evaluate the efficacy of RMT versus standard care or sham treatments in people with cervical SCI.Search MethodsWe searched the Cochrane Injuries and Cochrane Neuromuscular Disease Groups' Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2012, Issue 1), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, ISI Web of Science, PubMed, and clinical trials registries (Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ClinicalTrials, Controlled Trials metaRegister) on 5 to 8 March 2013. We handsearched reference lists of relevant papers and literature reviews. We applied no date, language, or publication restrictions.Selection CriteriaAll randomised controlled trials that involved an intervention described as RMT versus a control group using an alternative intervention, placebo, usual care, or no intervention for people with cervical SCI were considered for inclusion.Data Collection And AnalysisTwo review authors independently selected articles for inclusion, evaluated the methodological quality of the studies, and extracted data. We sought additional information from the trial authors when necessary. We presented results using mean differences (MD) (using post-test scores) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for outcomes measured using the same scale or standardised mean differences (SMD) and 95% CI for outcomes measured using different scales.Main ResultsWe included 11 studies with 212 participants with cervical SCI. The meta-analysis revealed a statistically significant effect of RMT for three outcomes: vital capacity (MD mean end point 0.4 L, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.69), maximal inspiratory pressure (MD mean end point 10.50 cm/H2O, 95% CI 3.42 to 17.57), and maximal expiratory pressure (MD mean end point 10.31 cm/H2O, 95% CI 2.80 to 17.82). There was no effect on forced expiratory volume in one second or dyspnoea. We could not combine the results from quality of life assessment tools from three studies for meta-analysis. Respiratory complication outcomes were infrequently reported and thus we could not include them in the meta-analysis. Instead, we described the results narratively. We identified no adverse effects as a result of RMT in cervical SCI.Authors' ConclusionsIn spite of the relatively small number of studies included in this review, meta-analysis of the pooled data indicates that RMT is effective for increasing respiratory muscle strength and perhaps also lung volumes for people with cervical SCI. Further research is needed on functional outcomes following RMT, such as dyspnoea, cough efficacy, respiratory complications, hospital admissions, and quality of life. In addition, longer-term studies are needed to ascertain optimal dosage and determine any carryover effects of RMT on respiratory function, quality of life, respiratory morbidity, and mortality.

      Pubmed     Free full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…