ORIGINAL ARTICLE   Free access

European Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine 2022 June;58(3):487-96

DOI: 10.23736/S1973-9087.22.07185-4

Copyright © 2022 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

language: English

Stimulation of both inspiratory and expiratory muscles versus diaphragm-only paradigm for rehabilitation in severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients: a randomized controlled pilot study

Zhiling ZHAO ¹, Wuzhuang SUN ², Xiaoyun ZHAO ³, Xiaojuan WANG ⁴, Yingxiang LIN ¹, Shu ZHANG ¹, Zhu LI ², Yong LU ¹, Juanni GONG ¹, Yanxia YU ¹, Bojun LI ³, Xiujuan HU ³, Yuechuan LI ³, Zhaohui TONG ¹ ✉

¹ Department of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, Beijing Institute of Respiratory Medicine and Beijing Chao-Yang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China; ² Department of Respiratory Medicine and PCCM, The First Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang City, Hebei Province, China; ³ Department of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Tianjin Chest Hospital, Tianjin, China; ⁴ Department of General Medicine, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China

BACKGROUND: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), a progressive lung disease, might improve with neuromuscular electrical stimulation. No trials on inspiratory plus expiratory neuromuscular electrical stimulation have been conducted yet.
AIM: The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of inspiratory plus expiratory neuromuscular electrical stimulation in subjects with severe COPD.
DESIGN: This was a multicenter, prospective, randomized controlled trial.
SETTING: The subjects were outpatients enrolled from Beijing Chao-Yang Hospital affiliated with Capital Medical University, Tianjin Chest Hospital, and the First Hospital of Hebei Medical University.
POPULATION: Subjects had stable COPD with severe respiratory impairment.
METHODS: Using a computer statistical software, 120 stable subjects were randomly allocated (1:1) to receive inspiratory plus expiratory neuromuscular electrical stimulation (study group) and diaphragm pacing (control group). Demographic and clinical data were collected before, and after 2, and 4 weeks of the trial. The intention-to-treat analysis was conducted. The primary outcome was to analyze the changes in functional exercise capacity, estimated as six-minute walk distance (6MWD), following electrical stimulation for 4 weeks. The secondary outcomes were changes in modified Medical Research Council score, forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), FEV1% predicted, and FEV1 ratio forced vital capacity (FEV1/FVC) following electrical stimulation for 4 weeks.
RESULTS: The change in 6MWD was greater in the study group (65.53±39.45 m) than in the control group (26.66±32.65 m). The mean between-group difference at the fourth week was 29.07 m (95% confidence interval, 16.098-42.035; P<0.001). There were no significant between-group differences in the secondary outcomes after 4 weeks of electrical stimulation. For GOLD-4 COPD subjects, FEV1 and FEV1/FVC improved in the study group (P<0.05). No electrical stimulation-related serious adverse events were observed in either group.
CONCLUSIONS: 6MWD were increased significantly, without adverse events, after four weeks of treatment of inspiratory plus expiratory neuromuscular electrical stimulation in stable patients with severe COPD, suggesting that this protocol benefits COPD rehabilitation.
CLINICAL REHABILITATION IMPACT: The results of this study suggest that the simultaneous use of inspiratory plus expiratory neuromuscular electrical stimulation as an adjunct therapy may improve the functional exercise capacity of severe stable COPD subjects.

KEY WORDS: Pulmonary disease, chronic obstructive; Electric stimulation therapy; Respiratory Function Tests