Randomized trial compares lung boost trainer and incentive spirometer on pulmonary function in children, suggesting lung boost trainer is more effective.
BACKGROUND: Cerebral palsy (CP) represents the leading cause of motor-related disability during childhood and may be presented by reduced chest wall movement, and weak respiratory muscles contribute to impaired pulmonary function. AIM: The current study was designed to compare the efficacy of Lung boost trainer versus an incentive spirometer on pulmonary function post COVID spastic hemiplegic CP children. METHODS: A single-blind randomized controlled trial. Recruited patients from the Faculty of Physical Therapy Clinics, Cairo University. Children aged from 4 to 9 years were randomly allocated into 3 groups (LBT n = 20, IST n = 20 and TRPT group n = 20). The three groups received as follows: lung Booster Training, Incentive Spirometer Training and Traditional Respiratory Physical Therapy, respectively. The intervention delivered five sessions per week for 4 weeks. Pulmonary function values and functional capacity evaluated through spirometry, six-minute walk test (6MWT), and Short Form-36 (SF-36) quality of life questionnaire targeted physical domain only before and after study. RESULTS: The study findings indicated that the pulmonary function values, 6MWT, and physical domain of SF-36 exhibited a difference that was statistically significant (p-value ≤ 0.05), which was observed among all groups following treatment, favoring group (LBT). CONCLUSIONS: Within the limits of this study, it was concluded that lung boost trainer was associated with significant improvements in pulmonary function in relation to FVC, FEV1, FEV1/FVC and functional capacity among children with spastic hemiplegic cerebral palsy following COVID-19. TRAIL REGISTRATION: NCT07508332 in the International Registry of Clinical Trials (www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mahmoud et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: