Next Article in Journal
Community-Engaged Air Monitoring to Build Resilience Near the US-Mexico Border
Previous Article in Journal
Application of the Anammox in China—A Review
Article

Evaluation of Respiratory Muscular Strength Compared to Predicted Values in Patients with Stroke

1
Faculty of Physiotherapy, University of Marilia (UNIMAR), Avenue Hygino Muzzy Filho, 1001, Marília 17525-902, São Paulo, Brazil
2
Postgraduate Program in Structural and Functional Interactions in Rehabilitation, University of Marilia (UNIMAR), Avenue Hygino Muzzy Filho, 1001, Marília 17525-902, São Paulo, Brazil
3
Medical School, University Center of Adamantina (UniFAI), Nove de Julho Street, 730–Centro, Adamantina 17800-000, São Paulo, Brazil
4
Department of Biological Sciences (Anatomy), Bauru School of Dentistry, University of São Paulo (USP), Alameda Dr. Octávio Pinheiro Brisolla, 9-75–Vila Universitaria, Bauru 17012-901, São Paulo, Brazil
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17(3), 1091; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17031091
Received: 18 December 2019 / Revised: 6 February 2020 / Accepted: 7 February 2020 / Published: 9 February 2020
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the inspiratory and expiratory muscle strength of individuals affected by stroke and to compare it with the predicted values in the literature considering their corresponding age. Respiratory muscle strength was evaluated in 22 elderly people who had sequels of stroke, four with right hemiparesis, 16 with left hemiparesis and two with bilateral, of ages ranging from 34 to 82 years. The collected data were submitted to statistical analysis using a Mann–Whitney test to evaluate if there was a significant difference in the average data collected when compared with a mean of the predicted data in the literature. Fourteen men and eight women were evaluated, who obtained mean values of 71.85 cmH2O and 57.75 cmH2O, respectively, for a maximal inspiratory pressure (MIP), and when compared to the predicted values for men and women, 105.41 cmH2O (p-value 0.0019) and 80.57 cmH2O (p-value 0.00464) were significantly lower. For a maximal expiratory pressure (MEP), the mean value obtained for men was 62.28 cmH2O and 49.5 cmH2O for women, whereas the predicted values in the literature were 114.79 cmH2O (p-value < 0.0001) and 78, 46 cmH2O (p-value 0.0059), respectively. In the statistical analysis, it was possible to notice that the studied population did not reach the predicted age indexes and that there was a significant difference between the median columns. In conclusion, there is a weakness in the respiratory muscles of hemiparetic men and women due to stroke. View Full-Text
Keywords: functional rehabilitation; maximal respiratory pressure; muscle strength; physiotherapy; public health; quality life; stroke functional rehabilitation; maximal respiratory pressure; muscle strength; physiotherapy; public health; quality life; stroke
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Ramos, S.M.; Silva, D.M.d.; Buchaim, D.V.; Buchaim, R.L.; Audi, M. Evaluation of Respiratory Muscular Strength Compared to Predicted Values in Patients with Stroke. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 1091. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17031091

AMA Style

Ramos SM, Silva DMd, Buchaim DV, Buchaim RL, Audi M. Evaluation of Respiratory Muscular Strength Compared to Predicted Values in Patients with Stroke. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2020; 17(3):1091. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17031091

Chicago/Turabian Style

Ramos, Sarah M., Daniela M.d. Silva, Daniela V. Buchaim, Rogério L. Buchaim, and Mauro Audi. 2020. "Evaluation of Respiratory Muscular Strength Compared to Predicted Values in Patients with Stroke" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 17, no. 3: 1091. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17031091

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop