Computerised lung sound monitoring to assess effectiveness of chest physiotherapy and secretion removal: a feasibility study

Outcome measures for airway clearance techniques in children with chronic obstructive lung diseases: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Airway clearance techniques (ACTs) are an important aspect of the treatment of children with chronic obstructive lung diseases. Unfortunately, a sound evidence base is lacking and airway clearance strategies are largely based on clinical expertise. One of the reasons for the limited evidence is the lack of appropriate outcome measures specifically related to the effectiveness of ACTs. This review discusses all outcome measures applied in previous research in the pediatric population to provide a baseline for future studies.

DATA SOURCES

A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, Web of Science and EMBASE databases. Search terms included chronic obstructive lung diseases and ACTs.

STUDY SELECTION

Studies were independently selected by the investigators according to the eligibility criteria. After screening, 49 articles remained for further analysis.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

Data are summarized according to the type of outcome measure. 48 (98%) studies performed pulmonary function tests, 19 (39%) assessed expectorated sputum, 10 (20%) parameters related to disease exacerbation, 8 (16%) oxygenation, 8 (16%) patient-reported outcomes, 5 (10%) exercise capacity and 5 (10%) applied imaging techniques. The synthesis of results showed a high discrepancy between studies due to differences in study design, population and the application of techniques. Since no 'gold standard' method could be identified, a combination of different outcome measures is recommended to gain a better understanding and to identify the potential effects of ACTs. An overview of important considerations has been provided to assist researchers in their choice of outcomes in future studies.

The effect of intrapulmonary percussive ventilation in pediatric patients: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Intrapulmonary percussive ventilation (IPV) is frequently used in clinical practice to enhance sputum evacuation and lung recruitment. However, the evidence in different respiratory pathologies, especially in children, is still lacking. This systematic review aims to enlist the effectiveness of IPV as an airway clearance technique in pediatric patients.

DATA SOURCES

A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library databases.

STUDY SELECTION

Studies were included if the subjects suffered from a respiratory disease requiring airway clearance and the mean age of the sample was <18 years. After screening, nine articles remained for further analysis.

RESULTS

Three of the nine articles examined patients with cystic fibrosis (CF). No significant differences in lung function or expectorated mucus were found compared to conventional chest physiotherapy. On the other hand, significant beneficial results were found for the treatment or prevention of atelectasis in non-CF patients using IPV. Similar results were seen when comparing therapies for neuromuscular/neurological patients. One study found that IPV reduced hospital stay and improved the clinical status of children with acute bronchiolitis compared to no physiotherapy. Severe adverse events did not occur in the included studies.

CONCLUSION

A limited number of studies investigated IPV in the pediatric population. Despite the heterogeneity across the studies and the small sample sizes, the results seem promising. IPV is suggested to be a safe and effective alternative for airway clearance. Future research is required to confirm these results and to further analyze the possible benefits in different respiratory pathologies.

Vibration response imaging: protocol for a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The concept of lung sounds conveying information regarding lung physiology has been used extensively in clinical practice, particularly with physical auscultation using a stethoscope. Advances in computer technology have facilitated the construction of dynamic visual images derived from recorded lung sounds. Arguably, the most significant progress in this field was the development of the commercially available vibration response imaging (VRI) (Deep Breeze Ltd, Or-Akiva, Israel). This device provides a non-invasive, dynamic image of both lungs constructed from sounds detected from the lungs using surface sensors. In the literature, VRI has been utilized in a multitude of clinical and research settings. This systematic review aims to address three study questions relating to whether VRI can be used as an evaluative device, whether the images generated can be characterized, and which tools and measures have been used to assess these images.

METHODS/DESIGN

This systematic review will involve implementing search strategies in five online journal databases in order to extract articles relating to the application of VRI. Appropriate articles will be identified against a set of pre-determined eligibility criteria and assessed for methodological quality using a standardized scale. Included articles will have data extracted by the reviewers using a standardized evidence table. A narrative synthesis based on a standardized framework will be conducted, clustering evidence into three main groups; one for each of the study questions. A meta-analysis will be conducted if two or more research articles meet pre-determined criteria that allow quantitative synthesis to take place.

DISCUSSION

This systematic review aims to provide a complete overview of the scope of VRI in the clinical and research settings, as well as to discuss methods to interpret the data obtained from VRI. The systematic review intends to help clinicians to make informed decisions on the clinical applicability of the device, to allow researchers to identify further potential avenues of investigation, and to provide methods for the evaluation and interpretation of dynamic and static images. The publication and registration of this review with PROSPERO provides transparency and accountability, and facilitates the appraisal of the proposed systematic review against the original design.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO registration number: CRD42013003751.