• FluTrackers.com Inc. does not provide medical advice. Information on this web site is collected from various internet resources, and the FluTrackers board of directors makes no warranty to the safety, efficacy, correctness or completeness of the information posted on this site by any author or poster. The information collated here is for instructional and/or discussion purposes only and is NOT intended to diagnose or treat any disease, illness, or other medical condition. Every individual reader or poster should seek advice from their personal physician/healthcare practitioner before considering or using any interventions that are discussed on this website. By continuing to access this website you agree to consult your personal physican before using any interventions posted on this website, and you agree to hold harmless FluTrackers.com Inc., the board of directors, the members, and all authors and posters for any effects from use of any medication, supplement, vitamin or other substance, device, intervention, etc. mentioned in posts on this website, or other internet venues referenced in posts on this website.
  • We are not asking for any donations. Do not donate to any entity who says they are raising funds for us.

Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci . Efficacy of high-frequency chest wall oscillations vs. lung flute in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients wit

tetano

Editor, Senior Moderator
Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci


. 2024 Feb;28(3):1227-1233.
doi: 10.26355/eurrev_202402_35361. Efficacy of high-frequency chest wall oscillations vs. lung flute in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients with post-COVID

O S Mahmoud Ahmed[SUP] 1 [/SUP], S Abd El-Rahim Abd El-Aty, H Ahmed El-Hadidy, N Mohamed Abdelhakiem, A Mohamed El-Moatasem



Affiliations
Abstract

Objective: In chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), high-frequency chest wall oscillations (HFCWO) and lung flute (LF) are used to improve COPD patients' pulmonary functions, exertional dyspnea, as well as life quality. This comparative study aimed to assess the efficiency of HFCWO vs. LF in post-coronavirus-disease (COVID) men with COPD.
Patients and methods: Sixty post-COVID men with COPD, who were aged 40-60 years old, were included in this HFCWO-vs.-LF comparative study and were divided into two groups. One group (N=30) received HFCWO, and the other group (N=30) received LF three times per week. Both groups' pulmonary functions, including forced vital capacity (FVC), forced expiratory volume at the first second (FEV1), the ratio of FEV1/FVC (FEV1/FVC), forced expiratory flow between 25% and 75% of the pulmonary volume (FEF25-75%) were assessed. Also, the COPD assessment test score (CAT score) and 6-minute walk distance (6MWD) were measured before and following the trial.
Results: Regarding all variables (post-COVID patients' FVC, FEV1, FEV1/FVC, FEF25-75%, CAT score, as well as 6MWD), both groups had substantial changes after the three-week HFCWO-vs.-LF interventional period as the p-value was below 0.05. The changes in post-COVID patients' FEV1, FEV1/FVC, and 6MWD were high in the HFCWO group, while the changes in post-COVID patients' CAT score, FVC, and FEF25-75% were high in the LF group.
Conclusions: HFCWO is more efficient than the LF in improving pulmonary functions and exertional dyspnea in post-COVID men with COPD.


 
Back
Top Bottom