医学
标准化
排气
协议(科学)
系统回顾
再现性
校准
重症监护医学
荟萃分析
肺
机械通风
气道
质量(理念)
物理疗法
梅德林
急诊医学
肺活量测定
吹气
随机对照试验
峰值流量计
医学物理学
重症监护
内科学
前瞻性队列研究
系统误差
流量测量
呼气末正压
流量(数学)
肺容积
作者
Raúl Escudero-Romero,Merete Salveson Engeset,Tiina Maarit Andersen,Aitor Martín‐Pintado‐Zugasti,Juan Nicolás Cuenca‐Zaldívar,Myriam Cabrera-Guerra,Jadranka Spahija
出处
期刊:Respiratory Care
[American Association for Respiratory Care]
日期:2026-06-25
卷期号:71 (10): 1179-1190
被引量:1
标识
DOI:10.1177/19433654261454978
摘要
BACKGROUND: Mechanical insufflation-exsufflation (MI-E) devices support airway clearance by generating positive and negative pressure cycles that simulate a cough. Bench studies using lung models provide a controlled environment to investigate device performance and optimize settings; however, the lack of methodological standardization limits reproducibility and clinical translation. METHODS: A systematic review and network meta-analysis were conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and registered in PROSPERO (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews) (CRD42023486537). Experimental studies using adult mechanical lung models were identified from MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science (search updated November 2024). Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed methodological quality using a customized risk-of-bias tool specifically developed for bench studies of respiratory devices. The primary outcome was peak expiratory flow (PEF); secondary outcomes included insufflation and exsufflation parameters. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed. RESULTS: O) produced significantly greater PEF compared with lower pressures, particularly in obstructive models (mean difference = 134 L/min, 95% CI 2-267). Methodological quality varied widely, with limited information on calibration, sensor characteristics, and study reproducibility. CONCLUSIONS: Higher pressure differentials generally enhance PEF, but optimal MI-E settings are not universal. MI-E performance depends on pressure settings and simulated respiratory mechanics. Clinically, these findings support individualized adjustment of MI-E parameters based on patient-specific characteristics. The lack of methodological standardization and calibration reporting limits comparability. A structured protocol for MI-E bench studies is proposed to enhance reproducibility, transparency, and translational relevance.
科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI