Skip to main content
. 2009 May-Jun;16(3):e6–e17. doi: 10.1155/2009/872921

TABLE 1.

Summary of randomized studies on hyperinflation

Author (reference), study design Description of groups and interventions Outcome measures Summary of main results
Barker and Adams (16), RCT Sample: Patients in ICU with ALI requiring MV (pressure support) (n=17)
Group 1 (n=5): OS in supine with 30° elevation
Group 2 (n=5): OS in ASL with 0° elevation
Group 3 (n=7): OS with manual hyperinflation in ASL (0° elevation)
All patients were hyperoxygenated
PaO2
PaCO2
Heart rate
Blood pressure
SvO2
Dynamic compliance
No significant difference between groups for any outcome measure
Disconnection of patients with ALI from MV can result in significant derecruitment of the lungs. The use of manual hyperinflation does not appear to override the loss of PEEP and the derecruitment effects
Choi and Jones (17), RCO Sample: Patients with VAP on MV (n=15)
Intervention 1: OS with manual hyperinflation
Intervention 2: OS alone
Static lung compliance
Airway resistance
Compliance was greater with intervention 1 immediately and 30 min after suctioning (P<0.001). Lower airway resistance with intervention 1 up to 30 min (P=0.02)
Berney and Denehy (18), RCO Sample: Patients in ICU requiring MV (n=20)
Intervention 1: OS, foot of the bed elevated to 35°–45°, six sets of 6 manual hyperinflation breaths
Intervention 2: OS, ventilator hyperinflation
All patients received six sets of 6 hyperinflations with 30 s of VT breathing between sets
Suctioned after every second set
Sputum wet weight
Static lung compliance
No significant difference in the sputum weight between interventions.
Both interventions improved pulmonary compliance (P<0.001)
Metz et al (19), RCO Sample: Patients in ICU requiring MV for acute respiratory failure (n=16)
Intervention 1: Standard off-ventilator suction
Intervention 2: Suctioning through an adaptor with intermittent ETT clamping
All patients received hyperoxygenation before and hyperoxygenation and hyperinflation postsuctioning
PaO2 No between-group comparisons reported
Within group changes were significant (P<0.05) up to 60 min postsuctioning with intervention 1 causing a decrease in PaO2 and intervention 2 causing an increase in PaO2

ALI Acute lung injury; ASL Alternate side lying; CS Closed suctioning; ETT Endotracheal tube; ICU Intensive care unit; MV Mechanical ventilation; OS Open suctioning; PaCO2 Arterial pressure of carbon dioxide; PaO2 Arterial pressure of oxygen; PEEP Positive end-expiratory pressure; RCO Randomized crossover study; RCT Randomized controlled trial; SvO2 Mixed venous oxygen saturation; VAP Ventilator-associated pneumonia; VT Tidal volume