Chest ACCP Member Benefits
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Guest Access | Sign In via User Name/Password
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Free
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Article Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Dohi, S
Right arrow Articles by Gold, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Dohi, S
Right arrow Articles by Gold, M.

Chest, Vol 73, 592-595, Copyright © 1978 by American College of Chest Physicians

ARTICLES

Comparison of two methods of postoperative respiratory care

S Dohi and MI Gold

After abdominal surgery, 64 patients were managed with one of the following two techniques of respiratory care: (1) deep breathing by way of a new device, an incentive spirometric three-ball, flow-measuring device (Triflo); and (2) standard episodic intermittent positive- pressure breathing (IPPB) every four hours. Both series of patients received therapy with a bronchodilator drug by nebulization. All patients had preoperative spirometric measurements followed by five consecutive days of therapy and spirometry. Chest x-ray films were obtained for all patients. There were no significant differences between the two methods of respiratory care, but 57 percent (17/30) in the group receiving therapy with IPPB developed pneumonia, atelectasis, or bronchitis, while only 29 percent (10/34) did so in the group using the incentive spirometric device (P less than 0.05). Spirometric differences were minimal, although the trend favored the incentive spirometric device. Principal conclusions were as follows: (1) deep breathing under the conditions of this investigation was equal to episodic therapy with IPPB; and (2) from an economic standpoint, IPPB, as it is currently practiced, may be disadvantageous when compared with the incentive spirometric device.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 NEJMHome page
P. S. Bellet, K. A. Kalinyak, R. Shukla, M. J. Gelfand, and D. L. Rucknagel
Incentive Spirometry to Prevent Acute Pulmonary Complications in Sickle Cell Diseases
N. Engl. J. Med., September 14, 1995; 333(11): 699 - 703.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1978 by the American College of Chest Physicians.