Email Alert | RSS

Journal of Tuberculosis and Lung Disease ›› 2020, Vol. 1 ›› Issue (1): 34-38.doi: 10.3969/j.issn.2096-8493.2020.01.008

• Original Articles • Previous Articles     Next Articles

Influence of respiratory training intervention on respiratory function and quality of life in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

LIU Si-mei, XI Xiu-feng, LI Bing()   

  1. Department of Respiratory,Zaozhuang Municipal Chest Hospital,Shandong Province, Zaozhuang 277500,China
  • Received:2020-03-19 Online:2020-06-30 Published:2020-07-07
  • Contact: LI Bing E-mail:sdwkyylb@126.com

Abstract:

Objective To evaluate the effect of respiratory training intervention on pulmonary function, anxiety, depression and other negative emotions, and symptom of dyspnea on hospitalized patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Methods A total of 82 COPD patients who were hospitalized due to acute exacerbation of the disease from June 2019 to December 2019 were collected and grouped according to the single and double numbers of the enrollment time series. Concretely, 41 patients received respiratory training intervention based on usual care at stable stage as the observation group, and 41 patients were adopted the routine nursing methods as the control group. Five patients with aggravation were removed. Finally, 77 cases were actually completed, including 40 in the observation group and 37 in the control group. The lung function of patients in the two groups was measured using lung function instrument. The self-assessment scale for anxiety (SAS) and the self-assessment scale for depression (SDS) were used to evaluate the negative emotions of patients. The self-assessment test questionnaire (CAT) was used to evaluate the symptoms of patients. The dyspnea scale (mMRC) was used to evaluate the symptoms of dyspnea. The respiratory function and quality of life of patients in the two groups were measured and evaluated by means of randomized experiment. Results The lung function of patients in the observation group after intervention was as follows: the forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) was (1.91±0.42) L, the FEV1 accounted for the percentage of predicted value (FEV1(%)) was (68.16±5.79)%, and the ratio of FEV1 to forced vital capacity (FEV1/FVC) was 66.20±2.00; the corresponding values in the control group were (1.59±0.31) L, (63.95±6.95)%, and 61.35±3.71, respectively, with the statistically significant differences between the two groups (t=3.86, 2.91, 7.06, respectively; all P=0.000). The SAS score of patients in the observation group after intervention was 38.55±8.72, which was lower than that in the control group (44.68±8.62), with the statistically significant difference (t=-3.10, P=0.000). The SDS score of patients in the observation group after intervention was 38.85±6.26, which was significantly lower than that of the control group (46.54±7.31), with the statistically significant difference (t=-4.94, P=0.000). The CAT score of patients in the observation group after intervention was 23.88±4.30, which was significantly lower than that of the control group (32.41±3.87), with the statistically significant difference (t=-9.16, P=0.000). The mMRC score of patients in the observation group after intervention was 1.73±0.85, which was significantly lower than that of the control group (2.49±0.93), with the statistically significant difference (t=-3.74, P=0.000). Conclusion The implementation of respiratory training intervention for patients with acute exacerbation of COPD can improve the lung function, reduce anxiety and depression, and improve the symptoms of dyspnea.

Key words: Pulmonary disease, chronic obstructive, Breathing exercises, Respiratory function tests, Intervention studies, Comparative effectiveness research