Chest
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 Mayos, M
Right arrow Articles by Sanchis, J
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Mayos, M
Right arrow Articles by Sanchis, J

Chest, Vol 100, 364-366, Copyright © 1991 by American College of Chest Physicians

REVIEWS

Measurement of maximal static respiratory pressures at the mouth with different air leaks

M Mayos, J Giner, P Casan and J Sanchis
Departament de Medicina, U.D. Sant Pau, Facultat de Medicina, Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona, Spain.

The effect of two different circuit leaks on the measurement of maximal static inspiratory and expiratory pressures at the mouth (Pimax, Pemax) was assessed in 70 patients with respiratory disease. Patients were divided into three groups with similar anthropometric and spirometric characteristics. The first group (30 patients) had their Pmax measured with a leak of 2.0 mm internal diameter (ID) and 37 mm length (as proposed by T. Ringqvist) and repeated with a second leak of 1.0 mm ID and 15 mm length (as recommended by J. L. Clausen). The two measurements were done in random order. Measurements for the other two groups (20 patients each) were taken with one or another, the two leaks randomly alternated with no leak. Pimax measurements obtained with Ringqvist's leak were 17 percent (p less than 0.005) lower than those with Clausen's leak and 22 percent (p less than 0.005) lower than those with no leak. Pemax measurements performed with Ringqvist's leak in place were 11 percent (p less than 0.005) lower than those with Clausen's leak and 11 percent (p less than 0.005) lower than those obtained with no leak. The comparison between Clausen's leak and no leak showed no statistically significant difference. We conclude that whenever the effect of pressure generated in the mouth is to be avoided in the measurement of respiratory Pmax, a leak of the size proposed by Ringqvist is to be preferred.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 ptjournalHome page
S. J Enright, V. B Unnithan, C. Heward, L. Withnall, and D. H Davies
Effect of High-Intensity Inspiratory Muscle Training on Lung Volumes, Diaphragm Thickness, and Exercise Capacity in Subjects Who Are Healthy
Physical Therapy, March 1, 2006; 86(3): 345 - 354.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1991 by the American College of Chest Physicians.