Comparison of Intrapulmonary Percussive Ventilation and Chest Physiotherapy: Conclusion
There are few published studies that examine the efficacy and safety of IPV in clinical settings. In a study involving ventilator-dependent patients with adult respiratory distress syndrome, patients ventilated with the IPV-1 had significantly better oxygenation and improved carbon dioxide elimination compared with those patients receiving conventional ventilation at the same positive end-expiratory pressures and proportion of oxygen in inspired air. Prior to the current study, the efficacy of IPV was examined in six patients with CF hospitalized with acute lower respiratory tract infections at our institution. Subjective ease of sputum expectoration without perceived clinical difficulty was noted. No adverse effects of IPV were identified by the patients or the respiratory therapists administering the IPV treatment. Canadianfamilypharmacy further Therefore, the purpose of this study was to investigate the safety of one-time IPV treatment under controlled conditions in clinically stable patients with CF.
For the adolescent and adult with CF, there may be numerous benefits to use of IPV for chest physiotherapy compared with standard P&PD. Independence is a difficult developmental task for all adolescents, but it is often more challenging in the adolescent with a chronic disease such as CF. Use of the IPV may allow the adolescent more control over one important aspect of his or her CF therapy. Furthermore, one complete treatment with IPV lasts approximately 20 min, compared with 30 min for aerosol delivery followed by P&PD. This significant time savings, coupled with ease and comfort of IPV administration, may contribute not only to more effective self-management of disease, but may also foster self-esteem and a sense of mastery. The safety of any new respiratory therapy must be assured before it can be recommended for further and more rigorous clinical trials, and certainly before clinical application. In this preliminary study, participants tolerated all respiratory treatments without adverse consequences or subjective discomfort.