Chest physiotherapy for acute bronchiolitis in paediatric patients between 0 and 24 months old

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023 Apr 3;4(4):CD004873. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004873.pub6.

Abstract

Background: Acute bronchiolitis is the leading cause of medical emergencies during winter months in infants younger than 24 months old. Chest physiotherapy is sometimes used to assist infants in the clearance of secretions in order to decrease ventilatory effort. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2005 and updated in 2006, 2012, and 2016.

Objectives: To determine the efficacy of chest physiotherapy in infants younger than 24 months old with acute bronchiolitis. A secondary objective was to determine the efficacy of different techniques of chest physiotherapy (vibration and percussion, passive exhalation, or instrumental).

Search methods: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, LILACS, Web of Science, PEDro (October 2011 to 20 April 2022), and two trials registers (5 April 2022).

Selection criteria: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in which chest physiotherapy was compared to control (conventional medical care with no physiotherapy intervention) or other respiratory physiotherapy techniques in infants younger than 24 months old with bronchiolitis.

Data collection and analysis: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

Main results: Our update of the searches dated 20 April 2022 identified five new RCTs with 430 participants. We included a total of 17 RCTs (1679 participants) comparing chest physiotherapy with no intervention or comparing different types of physiotherapy. Five trials (246 participants) assessed percussion and vibration techniques plus postural drainage (conventional chest physiotherapy), and 12 trials (1433 participants) assessed different passive flow-oriented expiratory techniques, of which three trials (628 participants) assessed forced expiratory techniques, and nine trials (805 participants) assessed slow expiratory techniques. In the slow expiratory subgroup, two trials (78 participants) compared the technique with instrumental physiotherapy techniques, and two recent trials (116 participants) combined slow expiratory techniques with rhinopharyngeal retrograde technique (RRT). One trial used RRT alone as the main component of the physiotherapy intervention. Clinical severity was mild in one trial, severe in four trials, moderate in six trials, and mild to moderate in five trials. One study did not report clinical severity. Two trials were performed on non-hospitalised participants. Overall risk of bias was high in six trials, unclear in five, and low in six trials. The analyses showed no effects of conventional techniques on change in bronchiolitis severity status, respiratory parameters, hours with oxygen supplementation, or length of hospital stay (5 trials, 246 participants). Regarding instrumental techniques (2 trials, 80 participants), one trial observed similar results in bronchiolitis severity status when comparing slow expiration to instrumental techniques (mean difference 0.10, 95% confidence interval (C) -0.17 to 0.37). Forced passive expiratory techniques failed to show an effect on bronchiolitis severity in time to recovery (2 trials, 509 participants; high-certainty evidence) and time to clinical stability (1 trial, 99 participants; high-certainty evidence) in infants with severe bronchiolitis. Important adverse effects were reported with the use of forced expiratory techniques. Regarding slow expiratory techniques, a mild to moderate improvement was observed in bronchiolitis severity score (standardised mean difference -0.43, 95% CI -0.73 to -0.13; I2 = 55%; 7 trials, 434 participants; low-certainty evidence). Also, in one trial an improvement in time to recovery was observed with the use of slow expiratory techniques. No benefit was observed in length of hospital stay, except for one trial which showed a one-day reduction. No effects were shown or reported for other clinical outcomes such as duration on oxygen supplementation, use of bronchodilators, or parents' impression of physiotherapy benefit.

Authors' conclusions: We found low-certainty evidence that passive slow expiratory technique may result in a mild to moderate improvement in bronchiolitis severity when compared to control. This evidence comes mostly from infants with moderately acute bronchiolitis treated in hospital. The evidence was limited with regard to infants with severe bronchiolitis and those with moderately severe bronchiolitis treated in ambulatory settings. We found high-certainty evidence that conventional techniques and forced expiratory techniques result in no difference in bronchiolitis severity or any other outcome. We found high-certainty evidence that forced expiratory techniques in infants with severe bronchiolitis do not improve their health status and can lead to severe adverse effects. Currently, the evidence regarding new physiotherapy techniques such as RRT or instrumental physiotherapy is scarce, and further trials are needed to determine their effects and potential for use in infants with moderate bronchiolitis, as well as the potential additional effect of RRT when combined with slow passive expiratory techniques. Finally, the effectiveness of combining chest physiotherapy with hypertonic saline should also be investigated.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02458300 NCT00125450 NCT00884429 NCT02460614 NCT03835936 NCT04260919 NCT02126748 12608000601336 NCT02708147 NCT02853838 NCT03738501 NCT03753802 NCT04553822.

Publication types

  • Review
  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Bronchiolitis* / drug therapy
  • Bronchodilator Agents / therapeutic use
  • Child
  • Child, Preschool
  • Drainage, Postural
  • Humans
  • Infant
  • Infant, Newborn
  • Oxygen
  • Physical Therapy Modalities
  • Respiratory Therapy* / methods

Substances

  • Bronchodilator Agents
  • Oxygen

Associated data

  • ClinicalTrials.gov/NCT02458300
  • ClinicalTrials.gov/NCT00125450
  • ClinicalTrials.gov/NCT00884429
  • ClinicalTrials.gov/NCT02460614
  • ClinicalTrials.gov/NCT03835936
  • ClinicalTrials.gov/NCT04260919
  • ClinicalTrials.gov/NCT02126748
  • ClinicalTrials.gov/12608000601336
  • ClinicalTrials.gov/NCT02708147
  • ClinicalTrials.gov/NCT02853838
  • ClinicalTrials.gov/NCT03738501
  • ClinicalTrials.gov/NCT03753802
  • ClinicalTrials.gov/NCT04553822