Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorSubhan, M
dc.date.accessioned2023-02-21T12:15:22Z
dc.date.issued2023-02-15
dc.identifier.issn1471-2466
dc.identifier.issn1471-2466
dc.identifier.other66
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10026.1/20484
dc.description.abstract

Background Maximal inspiratory pressure (MIP) is currently the most commonly used measure for respiratory muscle strength (RMS) estimation, however, requires significant effort. Falsely low values are therefore common, especially in fatigue-prone subjects, such as neuromuscular disorder patients. In contrast, sniff nasal inspiratory pressure (SNIP) requires a short, sharp sniff; this is a natural manoeuvre, decreasing required effort. Consequently, it has been suggested that use of SNIP could confirm the accuracy of MIP measurements. However, no recent guidelines regarding the optimal method of SNIP measurement exist, and varied approaches have been described. Objectives We compared SNIP values from three conditions, namely with 30, 60 or 90 s time intervals between repeats, the right (SNIPR) and left (SNIPL) nostril, and the contralateral nostril occluded (SNIPO) or non-occluded (SNIPNO). Additionally, we determined the optimal number of repeats for accurate SNIP measurement. Method 52 healthy subjects (23 males) were recruited for this study, of which a subset of 10 subjects (5 males) completed tests comparing the time interval between repeats. SNIP was measured from functional residual capacity via a probe in one nostril, while MIP was measured from residual volume. Results There was no significant difference in SNIP depending on the interval between repeats (P = 0.98); subjects preferred the 30 s. SNIPO was significantly higher than SNIPNO (P < 0.00001) but SNIPL and SNIPR did not significantly differ (P =  0.60). There was an initial learning effect for the first SNIP test; SNIP did not decline during 80 repeats (P =  0.64). Conclusions We conclude that SNIPO is a more reliable RMS indicator than SNIPNO, as there is reduced risk of RMS underestimation. Allowing subjects to choose which nostril to use is appropriate, as this did not significantly affect SNIP, but may increase ease of performance. We suggest that twenty repeats is sufficient to overcome any learning effect and that fatigue is unlikely after this number of repeats. We believe these results are important in aiding the accurate collection of SNIP reference value data in the healthy population.

dc.format.extent66-
dc.format.mediumElectronic
dc.languageen
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherBioMed Central
dc.subjectSNIP
dc.subjectRespiratory muscle strength
dc.subjectReproducibility
dc.subjectHealthy subjects
dc.titleOptimization of sniff nasal inspiratory pressure (SNIP) measurement methodology in healthy subjects.
dc.typejournal-article
dc.typeArticle
plymouth.author-urlhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36793023
plymouth.issue1
plymouth.volume23
plymouth.publisher-urlhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12890-023-02348-0
plymouth.publication-statusPublished online
plymouth.journalBMC Pulmonary Medicine
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/s12890-023-02348-0
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Faculty of Health
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Faculty of Health/School of Biomedical Sciences
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Users by role
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Users by role/Academics
dc.publisher.placeEngland
dcterms.dateAccepted2023-02-01
dc.rights.embargodate2023-2-23
dc.identifier.eissn1471-2466
dc.rights.embargoperiodNot known
rioxxterms.versionofrecord10.1186/s12890-023-02348-0
rioxxterms.licenseref.urihttp://www.rioxx.net/licenses/all-rights-reserved
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Review


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record


All items in PEARL are protected by copyright law.
Author manuscripts deposited to comply with open access mandates are made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the details provided on the item record or document. In the absence of an open licence (e.g. Creative Commons), permissions for further reuse of content should be sought from the publisher or author.
Theme by 
Atmire NV