SynthesisBMC pulmonary medicine2025
Blowing devices, resources and incentive screens during respiratory physiotherapy: a systematic review.
Synthesis in BMC pulmonary medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
introductionBlowing devices, resources, and incentive screens are routinely used in respiratory physiotherapy, but evidence of their effects remains scarce. This study aimed to investigate the effects of blowing strategies on various clinical outcomes during physiotherapy in individuals with respiratory disorders.
methodThis systematic review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines (CRD42022370442) and included experimental and quasi-experimental studies, including pilot studies, on the effects of blowing strategy interventions. Were considered studies published in English, Spanish, or Portuguese with no date restrictions.
resultsThe database search identified 838 records, of which 17 studies published between 1985 and 2024 were selected. The total sample included 823 individuals aged between 3 and 95 years. The blowing strategies used were the blowing bottle, balloon, party whistle, pinwheel, and visual feedback interfaces. Positive effects on various clinical outcomes were observed: five studies reported increased peripheral oxygen saturation after using the blowing bottle, pinwheel, balloon, and party whistle; three studies reported reduced respiratory rates after using the party whistle, balloon, and bubble blowing; two studies reported lower heart rates after using the party whistle and bubble blowing; two studies reported a reduction in dyspnea after using the blowing bottle and balloon; one study reported increased interest in physiotherapy treatment after using visual feedback blowing; and one study found a shorter hospital stay after using the blowing bottle.
conclusionBlowing strategies are used in physiotherapy across different populations, which contributes to the heterogeneity of findings. These strategies have positive effects on certain clinical outcomes, such as peripheral oxygen saturation and respiratory and heart rates. However, the results vary for pulmonary function, dyspnea, and length of hospital stay, depending on the type of device and the target population, which suggests the need for further studies for its use in clinical practice.
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.