ArticlePloS one2017
Inspiratory muscle activation increases with COPD severity as confirmed by non-invasive mechanomyographic analysis.
Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- The lung-muscle axis in COPD: a conceptual framework integrating evidence, mechanisms, and therapeutic perspectives.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- A MEMS seismometer respiratory monitor for work of breathing assessment and adventitious lung sounds detection via deep learning.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Updated Perspectives on the Role of Biomechanics in COPD: Considerations for the Clinician.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2022Review
- Chest Movement and Respiratory Volume both Contribute to Thoracic Bioimpedance during Loaded Breathing.Scientific reports · 2019Article
- Performance Evaluation of Fixed Sample Entropy in Myographic Signals for Inspiratory Muscle Activity Estimation.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Article
- A case of unexplained dyspnoea: when lung function testing matters!Breathe (Sheffield, England) · 2018Article
- Surface mechanomyography and electromyography provide non-invasive indices of inspiratory muscle force and activation in healthy subjects.Scientific reports · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There is a lack of instruments for assessing respiratory muscle activation during the breathing cycle in clinical conditions. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the usefulness of the respiratory muscle mechanomyogram (MMG) for non-invasively assessing the mechanical activation of the inspiratory muscles of the lower chest wall in both patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and healthy subjects, and to investigate the relationship between inspiratory muscle activation and pulmonary function parameters. Both inspiratory mouth pressure and respiratory muscle MMG were simultaneously recorded under two different respiratory conditions, quiet breathing and incremental ventilatory effort, in 13 COPD patients and 7 healthy subjects. The mechanical activation of the inspiratory muscles was characterised by the non-linear multistate Lempel-Ziv index (MLZ) calculated over the inspiratory time of the MMG signal. Subsequently, the efficiency of the inspiratory muscle mechanical activation was expressed as the ratio between the peak inspiratory mouth pressure to the amplitude of the mechanical activation. This activation estimated using the MLZ index correlated strongly with peak inspiratory mouth pressure throughout the respiratory protocol in both COPD patients (r = 0.80, p<0.001) and healthy (r = 0.82, p<0.001). Moreover, the greater the COPD severity in patients, the greater the level of muscle activation (r = -0.68, p = 0.001, between muscle activation at incremental ventilator effort and FEV1). Furthermore, the efficiency of the mechanical activation of inspiratory muscle was lower in COPD patients than healthy subjects (7.61±2.06 vs 20.42±10.81, respectively, p = 0.0002), and decreased with increasing COPD severity (r = 0.78, p<0.001, between efficiency of the mechanical activation at incremental ventilatory effort and FEV1). These results suggest that the respiratory muscle mechanomyogram is a good reflection of inspiratory effort and can be used to estimate the efficiency of the mechanical activation of the inspiratory muscles. Both, inspiratory muscle activation and inspiratory muscle mechanical activation efficiency are strongly correlated with the pulmonary function. Therefore, the use of the respiratory muscle mechanomyogram can improve the assessment of inspiratory muscle activation in clinical conditions, contributing to a better understanding of breathing in COPD patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.