Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Clinical Trial
. 1997 Oct;131(4):570-4.
doi: 10.1016/s0022-3476(97)70064-7.

Long-term comparative trial of conventional postural drainage and percussion versus positive expiratory pressure physiotherapy in the treatment of cystic fibrosis

Affiliations
Clinical Trial

Long-term comparative trial of conventional postural drainage and percussion versus positive expiratory pressure physiotherapy in the treatment of cystic fibrosis

P M McIlwaine et al. J Pediatr. 1997 Oct.

Abstract

We report the results of a long-term comparative trial of physiotherapy by the positive expiratory pressure (PEP) technique with a PEP mask (Astra Meditec) versus conventional postural drainage and percussion (PD&P). Forty patients, ages 6 to 17 years, with Shwachman scores between 52 and 93, attending the cystic fibrosis clinic were enrolled in the study and randomly assigned to one of two groups. Group A (control) continued to perform physiotherapy by using PD&P for a 1-year period, whereas patients assigned to group B performed physiotherapy with the PEP technique for the same period. Compliance with physiotherapy was closely monitored for both groups throughout the study. Clinical status and pulmonary function (forced vital capacity [FVC], FEV1, and FEF25-75) were measured at 3-month intervals. Group B (PEP) demonstrated improved pulmonary function in all parameters as measured by change in percent predicted value for age, gender, and height. The changes in pulmonary function over the study period were: FVC, +6.57; FEV1, +5.98; and FEF25-75, +3.32. This improvement was significantly different from that of group A (PD&P) whose pulmonary function declined in all parameters (FVC, -2.17; FEV1, -2.28; FEF25-75, -0.24). The differences between treatment groups were statistically significant for the changes in FVC (p = 0.02) and FEV(1) (p = 0.04). Our results indicate that for our patients with cystic fibrosis, pulmonary physiotherapy with the PEP technique was superior to conventional physiotherapy with the PD&P technique.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

Publication types