Comparison of the effect of recumbent body positions on dynamic lung function parameters in healthy adults (original) (raw)

Abstract

Background: Pulmonary function parameters can be altered with the change in body position. Therefore, physiological basis behind such consequent influence is essential to be understood. Pulmonary function tests are generally conducted in the erect sitting posture as it is more feasible and comfortable. However, bedridden patients are unable to do so and only few studies are found on recumbent postures. Thus, to comfort such patients in breathing, need arises to meet this requisite investigation to conclude the best recumbent body posture. Aim and Objectives: To compare and assess forced vital capacity (FVC), forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV 1), FEV 1 /FVC ratio, forced expiratory flow of during 25-75% expiration (FEF 25-75% , and peak expiratory flow rate (PEF) in the Supine, Crook-lying and Fowler's position. Materials and Methods: The present research was carried out on 128 healthy adults to measure FVC, FEV 1 , FEV 1 /FVC ratio, FEF 25-75% and PEF using a computer-based spirometer in the Supine, Crook-lying and Fowler's position. One-way Analysis of Variance with Tukey HSD post-hoc test was utilized between each body postures by evaluation of their mean values. Results: This study consisted of 128 subjects (males 57, females 71) with mean age of 21.62 ± 1.75 years, mean weight 59.71 ± 9.97 kg, mean height 164.68 ± 9.30 cm and Body mass index 21.91 ± 2.38 kg/m 2. Fowler's posture showed significantly (P < 0.05) higher value in all spirometric parameters as compared to other two postures. Outcome of the study showed all spirometric parameters value-greater in the Fowler's posture than that of Supine or Crook-lying posture. Conclusion: The implication of this research is that it will meet the need of selection of the most suitable substitute posture for better pulmonary functioning in bedridden people.

Loading...

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

References (21)

  1. Wallace JL, George CM, Tolley EA, Winton JC, Fasanella D, Finch CK, et al. Peak expiratory flow in bed? A comparison of 3 positions. Respir Care 2013;58:49497.
  2. Pal AK, Tiwari S, Verma DK. Effect of recumbent body positions on dynamic lung function parameters in healthy young subjects. J Clin Diagn Res 2017;11:CC08-10.
  3. Malathi RM, Rajkumar D, Gnanadesigan E, Balumahendran K. A study of pulmonary function tests among smokers in rural areas. IOSR J Dent Med Sci 2017;16:76-9.
  4. Gnanadesigan E, Vijayalakshmi B. A cross sectional study of VO2 max on passive smokers in Chennai city. Int J Curr Med Pharm Res 2021;7:5554-9.
  5. Ekambaram G, Vijayalakshmi B, Vara A. Effects of passive smoking on pulmonary functions of individuals in an urban area. Natl J Physiol Pharm Pharmacol 2022;12:1-6.
  6. Pankow W, Podszus T, Gutheil T, Penzel T, Peter J, Von Wichert P. Expiratory flow limitation and intrinsic positive end- expiratory pressure in obesity. J Appl Physiol 1998;85:1236-43.
  7. Whitfield AG, Waterhouse JA, Arnott WM. The total lung volume and its subdivisions. II. The effect of posture brit. J Soc Med 1950;4:86-97.
  8. Domingos-Benício NC, Gastaldi AC, Perecin JC, Avena KM, Guimaraes RC, Sologuren MJ, et al. Spirometric measurements in eutrophic and obese people in orthostatic, sitting and lying positions. J Braz Med Assoc 2004;50:142-7.
  9. Shepard JW Jr., Burger CD. Nasal and oral flow volume loops in normal subjects and patients with obstructive sleep apnea. Am Rev Respir Dis 1990;142:1288-93.
  10. Jenkins SC, Soutar SA, Moxham J. The effects of posture on lung volumes in normal subjects and in patients pre-and post- coronary artery surgery. Physiotherapy 1988;74:492-6.
  11. Pierson DJ, Dick NP, Petty TL. A comparison of spirometric values with subjects in standing and sitting positions. Chest 1976;70:17-20.
  12. Gudmundsson G, Cerveny M, Shasby DM. Spirometric values in obese individuals. Effect of body position. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1997;155:998-9.
  13. National Journal of Physiology, Pharmacy and Pharmacology 1330 2022 | Vol 12 | Issue 09
  14. Brazilian Society of Pulmonology and Tisology. Lung function testing guidelines. J Pneumol 2002;28 Suppl 3:S1-238.
  15. Costa GM, Lima JG, Lopes AJ. Spirometry: The influence posture and nasal clip during the maneuver. Pul-Hand 2006;15:143-7.
  16. McCoy EK, Thomas JL, Sowell RS, George C, Finch CK, Tolley EA, et al. An evaluation of peak expiratory flow monitoring: A comparison of sitting versus standing measurements, J Am Board Fam Med 2010;23:166-70.
  17. Valenza F, Vagginelli F, Tiby A, Francesconi S, Ronzoni G, Guglielmi M, et al. Effects of the beach chair position, positive end-expiratory pressure, and pneumoperitoneum on respiratory function in morbidly obese patients during anesthesia and paralysis. Anesthesiology 2010;107:725-32.
  18. Sudan DS, Singh H. A comparative study to evaluate the effect of crook lying position versus sitting position on forced vital capacity (FVC) in healthy individuals. J Clin Diagn Res 2014;8:17-9.
  19. Fiz JA, Aguilar X, Carreres A, Barbany M, Formiguera X, Izquierdo J, et al. Postural variation of the maximum inspiratory and expiratory pressures in obese patients. Int J Obes 1991;15:655-9.
  20. Vilke GM, Chan TC, Neuman T, Clausen JL. Spirometry in normal subjects in sitting, prone, and supine positions. Respir Care 2000;45:407-10.
  21. McMichael J, McGibbon JP. Postural changes in the lung volume. Clin Sci 1939;4:175-83.