A New Nasal Restriction Device Called FeelBreathe® Improves Breathing Patterns in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Patients during Exercise

Self Cite

This study compared the response of a 9-week cycling training on ventilatory efficiency under two conditions: (i) Combined with respiratory muscle training (RMT) using a new nasal restriction device (FeelBreathe) (FB group) and (ii) without RMT (Control group). Eighteen healthy elite cyclists were randomly separated into the FB group (n = 10) or Control group (n = 8). Gas exchange was measured breath by breath to measure ventilatory efficiency during an incremental test on a cycloergometer before (Pre) and after (Post) the nine weeks of training. The FB group showed higher peak power (Δ (95%HDI) (0.82 W/kg (0.49, 1.17)), VO2max (5.27 mL/kg/min (0.69, 10.83)) and VT1 (29.3 W (1.8, 56.7)) compared to Control at PostFINAL. The FB group showed lower values from Pre to PostPRE in minute ventilation (VE) (−21.0 L/min (−29.7, −11.5)), Breathing frequency (BF) (−5.1 breaths/min (−9.4, −0.9)), carbon dioxide output (VCO2) (−0.5 L/min (−0.7, −0.2)), respiratory equivalents for oxygen (EqO2) (−0.8 L/min (−2.4, 0.8)), heart rate (HR) (−5.9 beats/min (−9.2, −2.5)), respiratory exchange ratio (RER) (−0.1 (−0.1, −0.0) and a higher value in inspiratory time (Tin) (0.05 s (0.00, 0.10)), expiratory time (Tex) (0.11 s (0.05, 0.17)) and end-tidal partial pressure of CO2 (PETCO2) (0.3 mmHg (0.1, 0.6)). In conclusion, RMT using FB seems to be a new and easy alternative ergogenic tool which can be used at the same time as day-to-day training for performance enhancement.

“…Exp: 521/15/EC, Spain) ( Figure 1 ). The use of this device during exercise has been used in previous investigations, both in athletes [ 13 ] and in patients with COPD [ 16 , 17 ].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Exp: 521/15/EC, Spain) (Figure 1). The use of this device during exercise has been used in previous investigations, both in athletes [13] and in patients with COPD [16,17]. Participants were randomly assigned to either the cycling training combined with FB (FB, n = 10) or control group without FB (Control, n = 8).…”

Section: Training Programmentioning

confidence: 99%

Chronic Effects of a Training Program Using a Nasal Inspiratory Restriction Device on Elite Cyclists

González-Montesinos

Fernández-Santos

Vaz-Pardal

et al. 2021

Self Cite

“…Gonzalez-Montesinos et al studied this circumstance and observed that patients who have used FeelBreathe ® together with a pulmonary rehabilitation program show an improvement in quality of life, dyspnea, exercise capacity, and inspiratory muscle strength. However, the main limitation of these studies is the small number of patients, so more studies are needed to reach a definitive conclusion on the addition of FeelBreathe ® in a pulmonary rehabilitation program [31,55,56].…”

Section: Feelbreathe ®mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Depending on the size and porosity of the device material, the inspiratory process is more or less difficult. This device has the possibility of using it not only in a static situation but also dynamically during exercise [31]; 3.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Inspiratory Muscle Training in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) as Part of a Respiratory Rehabilitation Program Implementation of Mechanical Devices: A Systematic Review

Vázquez-Gandullo

Hidalgo-Molina

Montoro-Ballesteros

et al. 2022

Self Cite

Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) is a complex and heterogeneous disease, with pulmonary and extrapulmonary manifestations, which leads to the need to personalize the assessment and treatment of these patients. The latest updates of national and international guidelines for the management of COPD reveal the importance of respiratory rehabilitation (RR) and its role in improving symptoms, quality of life, and psychosocial sphere of patients. Within RR, the inspiratory muscle training (IMT) has received special interest, showing benefits in maximum inspiratory pressure, perception of well-being, and health status in patients with chronic heart disease, respiratory diseases, and dyspnea during exercise. The aim of this review is to assess the efficacy of IMT in COPD patients through the use of inspiratory muscle training devices, compared with respiratory rehabilitation programs without inspiratory muscle training. In the last years, many mechanical devices focused on inspiratory muscle training have been developed, some of them, such as the AirOFit PRO™, PowerBreath®, or FeelBreathe®, have shown clear benefits. The active search for candidate patients to undergo the RR program with inspiratory muscle training using this type of device in COPD patients represents an advance in the treatment of this disease, with direct benefits on the quality of life of the patients. In this article, we review the available evidence on IMT in these patients and describe the different devices used for it.

“…The larger one makes inspiration more difficult. Previous studies in COPD patients using FB have reported improvements in ventilatory efficiency and pattern, as well as increased inspiratory and expiratory time during exercise [ 12 ]. FB has also been reported to provide improvements in dyspnea, quality of life, exercise tolerance and inspiratory muscle strength after using it in an 8-week pulmonary rehabilitation programme [ 13 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of a Rehabilitation Programme Using a Nasal Inspiratory Restriction Device in COPD

González-Montesinos

Fernández-Santos

Vaz-Pardal

et al. 2021

Self Cite

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients are characterised for presenting dyspnea, which reduces their physical capacity and tolerance to physical exercise. The aim of this study was to analyse the effects of adding a Feel-Breathe (FB) device for inspiratory muscle training (IMT) to an 8-week pulmonary rehabilitation programme. Twenty patients were randomised into three groups: breathing with FB (FBG), oronasal breathing without FB (ONBG) and control group (CG). FBG and ONBG carried out the same training programme with resistance, strength and respiratory exercises for 8 weeks. CG did not perform any pulmonary rehabilitation programme. Regarding intra group differences in the value obtained in the post-training test at the time when the maximum value in the pre-training test was obtained (PostPRE), FBG obtained lower values in oxygen consumption (VO2, mean = −435.6 mL/min, Bayes Factor (BF10) > 100), minute ventilation (VE, −8.5 L/min, BF10 = 25), respiratory rate (RR, −3.3 breaths/min, BF10 = 2), heart rate (HR, −13.7 beats/min, BF10 > 100) and carbon dioxide production (VCO2, −183.0 L/min, BF10 = 50), and a greater value in expiratory time (Tex, 0.22 s, BF10 = 12.5). At the maximum value recorded in the post-training test (PostFINAL), FBG showed higher values in the total time of the test (Tt, 4.3 min, BF10 = 50) and respiratory exchange rate (RER, 0.05, BF10 = 1.3). Regarding inter group differences at PrePOST, FBG obtained a greater negative increment than ONBG in the ventilatory equivalent of CO2 (EqCO2, −3.8 L/min, BF10 = 1.1) and compared to CG in VE (−8.3 L/min, BF10 = 3.6), VCO2 (−215.9 L/min, BF10 = 3.0), EqCO2 (−3.7 L/min, BF10 = 1.1) and HR (−12.9 beats/min, BF10 = 3.4). FBG also showed a greater PrePOST positive increment in Tex (0.21 s, BF10 = 1.4) with respect to CG. At PreFINAL, FBG presented a greater positive increment compared to CG in Tt (4.4 min, BF10 = 3.2) and negative in VE/VCO2 intercept (−4.7, BF10 = 1.1). The use of FB added to a pulmonary rehabilitation programme in COPD patients could improve tolerance in the incremental exercise test and energy efficiency. However, there is only a statically significant difference between FBG and ONBG in EqCO2. Therefore, more studies are necessary to reach a definitive conclusion about including FB in a pulmonary rehabilitation programme.