Open AccessNeuromuscular electrostimulation as an adjuvant therapy to pulmonary rehabilitation programs in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
Author(s) -
Daniel Trăilă,
Camelia Pescaru,
Noemi Suppini Porojan,
Camil Mihuta,
Patricia Hogea,
Alexandru Crişan,
Lorena Ciumărnean,
Monica Marc
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
balneo research journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
eISSN - 2069-7619
pISSN - 2069-7597
DOI - 10.12680/balneo.2020.320
Subject(s) - medicine , pulmonary rehabilitation , copd , physical therapy , spirometry , neuromuscular disease , pulmonary disease , anesthesia , asthma , disease
. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is commonly associated with a vicious circle of sedentary lifestyle - deconditioning - muscular dysfunction. High-frequency neuromuscular electrostimulation has demonstrated beneficial effects among subjects with muscle weakness. This study aimed to evaluate the benefits of merging pulmonary rehabilitation program (PRP) with neuromuscular electrostimulation in patients with very severe COPD. Material and methods. The study included 38 males with clinically stable COPD, who were divided in 2 groups: group A-19 patients that underwent a PRP of 5 sessions/week for 4 weeks and group B-19 patients that underwent intercostal and lower extremity muscle electrostimulation (5 sessions/week for 4 weeks, 60 min /session) in association with the same type of PRP. Saint Georges’s Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), Modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) dyspnea scale, spirometry, maximal inspiratory pressure (PImax) and maximal expiratory pressure (PEmax), six minutes walking test (6MWT) and bio-electrical impedance were examined before and after the intervention. Results. Electrostimulation applied in group B increased muscle mass (50.15 ± 0.61kg vs 53.97 ± 0.87kg, p<0.001)., PEmax (5.41 ± 0.25 vs post 6.79 ± 0.22, p<0.0003) and improved mMRC score (2.68 ± 0.15 vs 2.10 ± 0.15, p<0.0109), 6MWT (369.6 ± 10.77m vs post: 445.6 ± 6.03 m) and SGRQ (61.32 ± 1.83 vs. 44.95 ± 1.94, p<0.0001). In group B only SGRQ score (55.05 ± 1.32 vs. 50.05 ± 1.51, p=0.018) was improved after PRP. Conclusion. A protocol which combines PRP with neuromuscular electrical stimulation in patients with very severe forms of COPD, has grater beneficial effect on dyspnoea, exercise tolerance, muscle mass toning and quality of life, compared with PRP alone.