IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v20y2023i7p5239-d1105214.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Effectiveness of Nonpharmacological Interventions in the Field of Ventilation: An Umbrella Review

Author

Listed:
  • Neuza Reis

    (Nursing Research, Innovation and Development Centre of Lisbon (CIDNUR), Rehabilitation Nurse, CHULC, 1900-160 Lisbon, Portugal)

  • Luis Gaspar

    (RN Centro Hospitalar Universitário S. Joao, 4200-319 Porto, Portugal)

  • Abel Paiva

    (NursingOntos, Escola Superior de Enfermagem do Porto, 4200-072 Porto, Portugal)

  • Paula Sousa

    (NursingOntos, Escola Superior de Enfermagem do Porto, 4200-072 Porto, Portugal)

  • Natália Machado

    (NursingOntos, Escola Superior de Enfermagem do Porto, 4200-072 Porto, Portugal)

Abstract

This umbrella review aimed to determine the effectiveness of nonpharmacological interventions in pulmonary ventilation and their impact on respiratory function. An individual with impaired ventilation displays visible variations manifested in their respiratory frequency, breathing rhythm ratio (I:E), thoracic symmetry, use of accessory muscles, dyspnea (feeling short of breath), oxygen saturation, diaphragm mobility, minute ventilation, peak flow, walking test, spirometry, Pimax/Pemax, diffusion, and respiratory muscle strength. Any variation in these markers demands the need for interventions in order to duly manage the signs and symptoms and to improve ventilation. Method: Systematic reviews of the literature published in English, Spanish, French, and Portuguese were used, which included studies in which nonpharmacological interventions were used as a response to impaired ventilation in adults in any given context of the clinical practice. The recommendations given by the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) for umbrella reviews were followed. This research took place in several databases such as MEDLINE, CINAHL Complete, CINHAL, MedicLatina, ERIC, Cochrane Reviews (Embase), and PubMed. The Joanna Briggs critical analysis verification list was used for the systematic review. The data extraction was performed independently by two investigators based on the data extraction tools of the Joanna Briggs Institute, and the data were presented in a summary table alongside the support text. Results: Forty-four systematic reviews, thirty randomized clinical essays, and fourteen observational studies were included in this review. The number of participants varied between n = 103 and n = 13,370. Fifteen systematic revisions evaluated the effect of isolated respiratory muscular training; six systematic revisions evaluated, in isolation, breathing control (relaxed breathing, pursed-lip breathing, and diaphragmatic breathing exercises) and thoracic expansion exercises; and one systematic review evaluated, in isolation, the positions that optimize ventilation. Nineteen systematic reviews with combined interventions that reinforced the role of education and capacitation while also aiming for their success were considered. The articles analyzed isolated interventions and presented their efficacy. The interventions based on respiratory exercises and respiratory muscular training were the most common, and one article mentioned the efficacy of positioning in the compromisation of ventilation. Combined interventions in which the educational component was included were found to be effective in improving pulmonary function, diffusion, oxygenation, and functional capacity. The outcomes used in each study were variable, leading to a more difficult analysis of the data. Conclusions: The interventions that were the focus of the review were duly mapped. The results suggest that nonpharmacological interventions used to optimize ventilation are effective, with a moderate to high level of evidence. There is a strong foundation for the use of the chosen interventions. The lack of studies on the intervention of “positioning to optimize ventilation” points out the need for a deeper analysis of its effects and for studies with a clear focus. This study supports the decisions and recommendations for the prescription of these interventions to patients with impaired ventilation.

Suggested Citation

  • Neuza Reis & Luis Gaspar & Abel Paiva & Paula Sousa & Natália Machado, 2023. "Effectiveness of Nonpharmacological Interventions in the Field of Ventilation: An Umbrella Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(7), pages 1-25, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:20:y:2023:i:7:p:5239-:d:1105214
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/7/5239/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/7/5239/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:20:y:2023:i:7:p:5239-:d:1105214. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.