Respiratory Muscle Strength: New Technology for Easy Assessment

Vasileios T Stavrou; Konstantinos N Tourlakopoulos; Zoe Daniil; Konstantinos I Gourgoulianis

doi:10.7759/cureus.14803

Respiratory Muscle Strength: New Technology for Easy Assessment

Cureus. 2021 May 2;13(5):e14803. doi: 10.7759/cureus.14803.

Authors

Vasileios T Stavrou¹, Konstantinos N Tourlakopoulos¹, Zoe Daniil¹, Konstantinos I Gourgoulianis¹

Affiliation

¹ Laboratory of Cardio-Pulmonary Testing and Pulmonary Rehabilitation, Respiratory Medicine Department, Faculty of Medicine, University of Thessaly, Larissa, GRC.

Abstract

Respiratory muscle strength (RMS) is associated with good functionality of the respiratory system. For the general population, it refers to the quality of life, and for the athletes, is related to greater performance. In this study, a comparison was made between two different portable devices, MicroRPM (CareFusion, Kent, United Kingdom) and AirOFit PRO™ (AirOFit, Copenhagen, Denmark), assessing the maximum inspiratory pressure (MIP) and maximum expiratory pressure (MEP). Twenty-one male professional athletes were evaluated on a voluntary basis and randomly used the devices for RMS assessment, while all athletes underwent Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), pulmonary function tests and ergospirometry. All measurements of MIP and MEP were made with the same methodology and all participants after the efforts answered the question "easy-operation device-information" and dyspnea and/or respiratory fatigue during trials with the CR10 scale. Results showed statistical differences between VO_2max and maximal respiratory strength both for AirOFit PRO™ (r=0.526, p=0.014) and in MicroPRM (r=0.567, p=0.007). The PSQI score showed statistical differences in % of predicted values in MEP with the AirOFit PRO™ device (r=0.478, p=0.028). Athletes reported that the AirOFit PRO™ device is easier in operation as a device and provides more information during trial comparisons to MicroPRM (p=0.001). Athletes reported that the AirOFit PRO™ device is easier in operation as a device and provides more information during the trial compared to MicroPRM. The results did not show differences in RMS (MIP and MEP) between devices (p>0.05). For the people who want to train with tele-exercise and/or tele-rehabilitation, the AirOFit PRO™ device would be an important and safe training solution.

Keywords: athletes; device; respiratory muscle strength.