Search

To determine the strength of the evidence evaluating the effectiveness of intrapulmonary percussive ventilation (IPV) as a safe alternative or adjunctive therapy to traditional chest physiotherapy (CPT) among potential organ donors.~Objective~Objective~Literature search conducted from February 2015 to November 2015 using PubMed, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Scopus, and bibliographies of pertinent articles. Search Terms: Intrapulmonary percussive ventilation, chest physiotherapy, chest wall oscillation, organ donors, and ventilation.~Data Sources~Methods~Articles in English from 1994 to present directly compared IPV to CPT or conventional (no) therapy.~Study Selection~Methods~Association of Critical-Care Nurses Levels of Evidence was used to determine the strength of evidence. Level B and level C articles were reviewed.~Data Extraction~Methods~No studies were found using IPV in the donor population. Results from studies using IPV in other populations indicated IPV had no adverse effects, improved sputum clearance and oxygenation, and reduced atelectasis and pneumonia in patients with artificial airways.~Data Synthesis~Results~Intrapulmonary percussive ventilation may be a safe and effective alternative or adjunctive to CPT therapy and improve the number of lungs available for transplantation. Clinical research is essential to determine the effectiveness of this therapy for lung recruitment in the donor population.~Conclusion~Conclusions [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Despite potential benefits of intrapulmonary percussive ventilation (IPV) in various respiratory diseases, the impact of setting parameters on the mechanical effects produced by IPV in the lungs is unknown. We hypothesized that changing the parameters on IPV would modulate these effects. This in vitro study aimed at comparing the changes in intrapulmonary effects resulting from changes in parameters in 3 portable IPV devices (IMP2, Impulsator, and Pegaso). METHODS: Parameters were set in 72 combinations of frequency (90-250 cycles/min), inspiratory to expiratory (I/E) time ratio (from 1/2 to 3/1), and pressure (10-60 cm H2O). Four resulting effects were recorded on a test lung via a pneumotachometer: the expiratory to inspiratory flow ratio (E/I flow ratio), the PEEP, the ventilation, and the percussion. Percussion was assessed by the end-slope of the pressure curve. Analysis of variance was used for data analysis. RESULTS: E/I flow ratio increased with increasing I/E time ratio (P < .001). The Pegaso produced the lowest E/I flow ratio. PEEP raised 6 cm H2O in both IMP2 and Impulsator, and 17 cm H2O in the Pegaso with increasing frequency (P < .01), pressure, and I/E time ratio (P < .001). In all devices, ventilation increased with increasing pressure and decreasing frequency (P < .001). Percussion increased with increasing frequency and decreasing I/E time ratio (P < .001), and with increasing pressure when I/E time ratio was 1/1 or less. The Pegaso provided the poorest percussion. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that changing the parameters considerably modulates the mechanical effects produced by portable IPV devices in the lungs. Increasing frequency increased PEEP and percussion, but decreased ventilation. Increasing I/E time increased PEEP and E/I flow ratio, and decreased percussion. Finally, increasing pressure increased PEEP and ventilation. The Pegaso produced the highest PEEP, least percussion, and smallest... [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Persistent atelectasis in children is lacking a gold standard treatment. Intrapulmonary percussive ventilation (IPV) is presented as a promising chest physiotherapy technique in the treatment of atelectasis. This study aimed to follow the evolution of atelectasis resolution with noninvasive IPV in young children and to detect eventual adverse effects. Methods: Six children were hospitalized for respiratory distress with suspicion of atelectasis. A 15 min IPV treatment was immediately started at D1 twice a day for 5 days. Children were free of any other treatment. Chest X-Ray (CXR) was performed on the second day (D2) and was repeated 3 days later (D5). After the study, CXR were retrospectively reviewed by three specialists who had no knowledge of the clinical observations of the patients. They were asked to assess atelectasis by a score between 4 (complete collapse) and 0 (complete resolution). A clinical score on a maximum of 4 points was assessed by appetite deterioration, dyspnoea, mucus production and cough presence at D1 and D5 (1 point per symptom present). Paired t-test compared D1 and D5 results. Results: All patients returned home after 5 days IPV. SpO2 normalized (93.2 ± 0.8 to 95.3 ± 0.8; P = 0.002) and patients all improved clinically (score, 2.8 ± 0.9 to 0.8 ± 0.6; P < 0.05). Out of four patients with radiographic evidence of atelectasis, three improved their atelectasis score. Conclusions: No side-effect or adverse effect was observed during IPV treatments. IPV was safe and effective in atelectasis resolution in 3/4 of the cases. Patients all recovered a stable clinical state. CXR improved in 4/5 children. They were all discharged home after 5 days of IPV treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]