Use the Back button in your browser to see the other results of your search or to select another record.
Long-term comparative trial of positive expiratory pressure versus oscillating positive expiratory pressure (flutter) physiotherapy in the treatment of cystic fibrosis |
McIlwaine PM, Wong LT, Peacock D, Davidson AGF |
The Journal of Pediatrics 2001 Jan;138(6):845-850 |
clinical trial |
5/10 [Eligibility criteria: Yes; Random allocation: Yes; Concealed allocation: No; Baseline comparability: Yes; Blind subjects: No; Blind therapists: No; Blind assessors: Yes; Adequate follow-up: No; Intention-to-treat analysis: No; Between-group comparisons: Yes; Point estimates and variability: Yes. Note: Eligibility criteria item does not contribute to total score] *This score has been confirmed* |
OBJECTIVE: The objective was to evaluate the long-term effects of physiotherapy with an oscillating positive pressure device ("flutter") compared with physiotherapy with the use of a positive expiratory pressure (PEP) mask in patients with cystic fibrosis (CF). STUDY DESIGN: Forty children with CF were randomly assigned to performing physiotherapy with the PEP mask or the nutter device for 1 year. Clinical status, pulmonary function, and compliance were measured at regular intervals throughout the study. RESULTS: The nutter group demonstrated a greater mean annual rate of decline in forced vital capacity compared with the PEP group (-8.62 +/- 15.5 versus 0.06 +/- 7.9; p = 0.05) with a similar trend in forced expiratory volume in 1 second (-10.95 +/- 19.96 versus -1.24 +/- 9.9; p = 0.08). There was a significant decline in Huang scores (p = 0.05), increased hospitalizations (18 versus 5; p = 0.03), and antibiotic use in the nutter group. CONCLUSION: Flutter was not as effective in maintaining pulmonary function in this group of patients with CF compared with PEP and was more costly because of the increased number of hospitalizations and antibiotic use.
|