ArticlePloS one2024
Comparative analysis of pulmonary ventilation distribution between low-cost and branded incentive spirometers using electrical impedance tomography in healthy adults: Study protocol.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Incentive Spirometer (IS) increases lung volume and improves gas exchange by visually stimulating patients to take slow, deep breaths. It prevents respiratory complications and treats postoperative atelectasis in patients undergoing abdominal, thoracic, and neurosurgical procedures. Its effectiveness has been validated in studies that support improved lung capacities and volumes in individuals with respiratory complications, postoperative thoracic surgery, upper abdominal surgery, and bariatric surgery. The modified Pachón incentive spirometer (MPIS) is a cost-effective alternative to branded IS. It is crucial to validate whether the MPIS distributes ventilation as effectively as commercial devices do. Ventilation distribution will be measured using electrical impedance tomography.
objectiveThe aim is to compare the distribution of pulmonary ventilation between the MPIS and another commercial IS in healthy adults using electrical impedance tomography.
methodsA crossover clinical trial is proposed to evaluate the measurement of pulmonary ventilation distribution using EIT in a sample of healthy adults. All participants will use a commercial flow IS and the MPIS, with the order of assignment randomized. This research will use electrical impedance tomography to validate the operation of the MPIS.
conclusionsThis study protocol will compare two incentive spirometers' impact on pulmonary ventilation, potentially endorsing the adoption of a cost-effective device to enhance accessibility for targeted populations.
trial registrationThe study was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (NTC05532748).
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.