Respiration 2012;83:115–124
(DOI:10.1159/000324449)

The Effects of Controlled Breathing during Pulmonary Rehabilitation in Patients with COPD

van Gestel A.J.R.a, b, e · Kohler M.b · Steier J.c, d · Teschler S.a · Russi E.W.b · Teschler H.a
aDepartment of Pneumology, University Hospital Ruhrlandklinik, Essen, Germany; bPulmonary Division, University Hospital of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland; cKings College London School of Medicine, dRoyal Brompton Hospital, London, UK; eZurich University of Applied Sciences, Winterthur, Switzerland
email Corresponding Author


 Outline


 goto top of outline Key Words

  • Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
  • Controlled breathing
  • Respiratory biofeedback
  • Pulmonary rehabilitation
  • Diaphragmatic breathing
  • Pursed lips breathing

 goto top of outline Abstract

Background: Conventional pulmonary rehabilitation programs improve exercise tolerance but have no effect on pulmonary function in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The role of controlled breathing using respiratory biofeedback during rehabilitation of patients with COPD remains unclear. Objectives: To compare the effects of a conventional 4-week pulmonary rehabilitation program with those of rehabilitation plus controlled breathing interventions. Methods: A randomized controlled trial was performed. Pulmonary function (FEV1), exercise capacity (6-min walking distance, 6MWD), health-related quality of life (chronic respiratory questionnaire, CRQ) and cardiac autonomic function (rMSSD) were evaluated. Results: Forty COPD patients (mean ± SD age 66.1 ± 6.4, FEV1 45.9 ± 17.4% predicted) were randomized to rehabilitation (n = 20) or rehabilitation plus controlled breathing (n = 20). There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups regarding the change in FEV1 (mean difference –0.8% predicted, 95% CI –4.4 to 2.9% predicted, p = 0.33), 6MWD (mean difference 12.2 m, 95% CI –37.4 to 12.2 m, p = 0.16), CRQ (mean difference in total score 0.2, 95% CI –0.1 to 0.4, p = 0.11) and rMSSD (mean difference 2.2 ms, 95% CI –20.8 to 25.1 ms, p = 0.51). Conclusions: In patients with COPD undergoing a pulmonary rehabilitation program, controlled breathing using respiratory biofeedback has no effect on exercise capacity, pulmonary function, quality of life or cardiac autonomic function.

Copyright © 2011 S. Karger AG, Basel


goto top of outline Introduction

Expiratory flow limitation in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) results from progressive airway inflammation causing parenchymal destruction, mucosal oedema, airway remodelling, mucous impaction and increased cholinergic airway smooth muscle tone [1]. Advanced COPD is associated with reduced exercise tolerance and daily physical activity resulting in impaired health-related quality of life [2], high health care use [3] and increased mortality [4]. Furthermore, patients with advanced COPD have a pathological breathing pattern with enhanced intrathoracic pressure swings due to severe airway obstruction [5]. Previous studies have shown that pulmonary rehabilitation programs improve exercise tolerance [6,7] and peripheral muscle strength [8], reduce exacerbation rate [9] and improve health-related quality of life, but not pulmonary function in patients with COPD [10,11].

Predominantly diaphragmatic breathing (DB), pursed-lips breathing (PLB) and prolonged exhalation are the most commonly used controlled breathing techniques and the use of each of these modalities has certain clinical benefits. PLB appears to be an effective way to decrease dyspnoea [12], improve walking distance [13] and gas exchange [14,15]. DB in patients with COPD has been associated with improvement in blood gases [16]. However, the relative contribution of each of these modalities to the overall improvement of the patients is not clear. Previous studies assessing the effectiveness of controlled breathing included small numbers of heterogeneous patients and lacked a control group [15].

To address the question whether controlled breathing improves outcome of rehabilitation in COPD patients, we performed a randomized controlled trial (RCT) using respiratory feedback training (RBF) to assess the effects of a 4-week rehabilitation program using outcome parameters including pulmonary function tests, cardiopulmonary exercise capacity, health-related quality of life and cardiac autonomic modulation. We hypothesized that COPD patients who undergo pulmonary rehabilitation plus controlled breathing will benefit more than patients participating in conventional pulmonary rehabilitation classes.

 

goto top of outline Methods and Materials

goto top of outline Study Subjects

Patients with COPD referred to the Department of Respiratory Medicine, Ruhrlandklinik, University of Duisburg-Essen, Germany, between November 2008 and July 2009 were considered for participation in the study. Inclusion criteria were: clinically stable disease (no changes in medication dosage or frequency of administration, no clinical signs or symptoms of acute exacerbations and no hospital admissions in the preceding 6 weeks), age between 40 and 75 years, postbronchodilator FEV1 of less than 80% predicted and an FEV1/FVC ratio of less than 0.7, and a BMI of more than 18 and less than 25 kg/m2. We excluded patients with respiratory disorders other than COPD, α1-antitrypsin deficiency, a history of significant inflammatory disease other than COPD, cardiac diseases such as heart failure, cardiac arrhythmia and/or coronary artery disease, patients with a history of lung surgery, patients with diagnosis of cancer and patients who were unable to walk. Patients with oral corticosteroids and/or vasoactive medication at inclusion were also excluded from the study. Each participant signed and dated a written informed consent form prior to participation.

The study was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of the Medical Faculty, University of Essen-Duisburg, Germany (No. 07-3524) and written informed consent was obtained from all patients.

goto top of outline Study Design

We performed a RCT with sequential analysis of the clinical training effects; tests were performed prior to and following completion of cardiopulmonary exercise training.

goto top of outline Methods

Cardiopulmonary Exercise Training
Cardiopulmonary exercise training was performed according to publishedguidelines [17,18,19]. Participants attended the outpatient clinic 3 times per week (1.5-hour sessions) for 3–4 weeks performing 10 sessions of physical training. The session included dynamic strength training for the following muscles: quadriceps femoris, hamstrings, triceps surae, pectoralis major, deltoid, latissimus dorsi and triceps brachi. The dynamic strength training exercises were performed while seated. Patients started at 70% of their initial 1-repetition maximum (1RM) and fulfilled 3 cycles of 10 repetitions of isotonic muscle contractions [17,18,19] with a resting period of 2 min between the series. 1RM is the maximum amount of weight one can lift during a single repetition of a given exercise.

When the patients were able to perform 3 sets of 10 repetitions without any difficulty, effort was increased stepwise by 5% of the 1RM. Cardiopulmonary endurance training was performed on a cycle ergometer, using stepping exercises and arm cranking [17,18,19]. The initial intensity for cycling was set at 30% peak workload for 20 min. Increases in workload were based upon symptom scores.

Controlled Breathing Training
Twenty patients allocated to the RBF group participated in 10 supplemental 30-min sessions of controlled breathing using techniques of respiratory biofeedback training and were instructed on its performance during the first training session [20,21,22]. The respiratory biofeedback training system visually displays the desired respiratory pattern: the patients were trained to voluntarily improve their breathing pattern at rest for 10 min while seated with instructions for daily home practice. Furthermore, the patients were trained to improve their breathing pattern during the 20 min of cardiopulmonary endurance training which was performed on a cycle ergometer.

The patients were trained to modify four respiratory characteristics: rapid shallow breathing (increased respiratory rate and low tidal volume), breath-to-breath irregularity in rate and depth and predominant thoracic breathing. DB was performed as described by Gosselink [23,24] by ‘facilitating outward motion of the abdominal wall while reducing upper rib cage motion during inspiration’.

Dynamic hyperinflation occurs when inspiration commences prior to completion of the preceding exhalation so that air is trapped ‘upstream’ at the small bronchiolar and alveolar levels. To reduce dynamic hyperinflation, the patients were encouraged by prolonging the expiration prior to the initiation of the next breath while using PLB.

The breathing pattern was monitored by respiration sensors that measure the patient’s breathing rhythm at both umbilical and abdominal level. The respiration sensors were connected to an amplifier (Nexus-10™ medical device class IIa; TMS International BV, Enschede, The Netherlands) that converts the electrical impulses into acoustical and visual outputs. BioTrace+ software was used for physiological monitoring and signal processing.

The RBF training works with simple acoustic tones and visual graphic signals in order to inform the patient precisely about their actual breathing pattern. Both signals were simultaneously used as a feedback for the patient via an earphone and an overhead screen. Both signals increase and decrease in volume and intensity as the patient breathes in and out.

goto top of outline Measurements

Pulmonary Function
Spirometry, whole body plethysmography and diffusion capacity measurements were performed according to the American Thoracic Society and the European Respiratory Society guidelines with a commercially available system (Body 500™; ZAN, Oberthulba, Germany) [25]. Postbronchodilator spirometry was performed on the same day as the exercise tests (6-min walk test, 6MWT). Maximal inspiratory mouth occlusion pressure after 100 ms was measured as previously described [26].

goto top of outline Six-Minute Walk Test

All patients performed the 6MWT following pulmonary function testing. 6MWT distance was measured according to the guidelines of the American Thoracic Society [27,28]. Oxygen saturation and pulse rate were recorded using a standard pulse oximeter (Nexus-10™ medical device class IIa; TMS International BV). Additionally, scored sensations of breathlessness and leg fatigue were assessed using a modified Borg scale [29]. The 6MWT was performed on a 30-meter indoor track by an experienced investigator using standardized encouragement strategy [30], and the results were recorded in absolute values and in percent predicted [27]. To control for any learning effect, all patients performed two 6MWTs on two separate days, and the results of the second test were used for analysis.

goto top of outline Health-Related Quality of Life

The Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire (CRQ) is an established measure of health status for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease [31,32]. Previous studies have shown that an improvement in score in any domain of the CRQ of ≧0.5 represents the minimal clinically important difference that is noticeable to patients [31], changes in any domain of the CRQ >1.0 represent moderate improvements and changes in any domain of the CRQ >1.5 represent large improvements in health-related quality of life [32].

goto top of outline Cardiac Autonomic Function

Analysis of heart rate variability (HRV) is a powerful method to assess the autonomic nervous system. HRV is a physiological phenomenon describing the variation of the time interval between heart beats which is related to the relative acitivity of the sympathetic and parasympathetic nervous system. A reduced HRV implies an impaired ability of the heart to alter its own beat frequency and therefore a pathological condition of the cardiovascular system [33,37,38,39]. Cardiovascular autonomic function was assessed by measuring the standard time and frequency domain measures of HRV from 5 min of the R-R interval recordings in the ECG, with the patients in seated. HRV was obtained via 3-channel ECG recording (Nexus-10™ medical device class IIa; TMS International BV) as recommended by the Task Force of the European Society of Cardiology and the North American Society of Pacing and Electrophysiology [33]. To eliminate artefacts an automatic filter excluded RR sequence differing by more than 30% from the previous interval [33]. Time domain measures of HRV were calculated from the R-R interval tachograms. The following time domain measures of HRV were calculated: mean R-R (NN mean) in milliseconds, the standard deviation of R-R intervals (SDNN) in milliseconds and the root mean square successive difference of R-R intervals (rMSSD) in milliseconds.

The following standard frequency domain measures of HRV were computed: high-frequency spectral power (HF power, the density of the beat-to-beat oscillation in the R-R interval of HRV in the high-frequency band; HF = 0.15–0.4 Hz), low-frequency spectral power (LF power, the density of the beat-to-beat oscillation in the R-R interval of HRV in the low-frequency band; LF = 0.04–0.15 Hz), the ratio of LF to HF power (LF/HF ratio). LF/HF ratio has been described as a marker of sympathetic to parasympathetic balance [34,35,36]. Spectral components were expressed both as absolute values in milliseconds and as normalized units. To reflect the degree of parasympathetic modulation of heart rate, we used both HF power (%) and rMSSD (ms) [33,37,38,39].

goto top of outline Data Analysis

We performed an RCT (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01175265) with sequential analysis of the clinical training effects; tests were performed prior to and following completion of cardiopulmonary exercise training. Twenty patients were assigned to receive 10 sessions of 1.5 h of physical exercise training plus additional ten 30-min RBF sessions (RBF group). In the other group, 20 patients were assigned to receive ten 1.5-hour sessions of physical exercise training only (control group) over 4 weeks. The technicians, who performed the pulmonary function tests and 6MWTs, were blinded for the randomization. In order to control for any residual learning effect, the patients performed two 6MWTs at baseline on separate days; the second 6MWT was used for analysis.

Data on pulmonary function, cardiopulmonary exercise capacity, health-related quality of life and cardiac autonomic modulation were collected prior to and following completion of 4 weeks of pulmonary rehabilitation.

A statistical software package was used for statistical analysis (SPSS for Windows, version 11.0; SPSS Inc., Chicago, Ill., USA). Descriptive data for continuous variables are expressed as mean ± SD. Effects of pulmonary rehabilitation were evaluated by within-group comparisons of changes over 4 weeks, using paired Student’s ttests. Differences in changes from baseline to follow-up between the two groups were compared using unpaired Student’s t tests. A p value of <0.05 was considered to be significant.

 

goto top of outline Results

goto top of outline Patients

Sixty-three patients with COPD (GOLD class I–IV) were evaluated for study participation. Forty-three patients were eligible for the study and agreed to participate. Twenty-two patients were randomized to the RBF group and 21 to the control group. Three patients withdrew from the study due to an acute COPD exacerbation during the training period.

Baseline anthropometrical characteristics and pulmonary function data of the 40 patients (23 females) with COPD are presented in table 1. Twenty-two patients had mild to moderate disease (GOLD I n = 4; GOLD II n = 18), and 18 patients had severe or very severe COPD (GOLD III n = 16; GOLD IV n = 2). There were no significant differences in the baseline anthropometrical characteristics and pulmonary function test results between the group receiving RBF and the control group.

TAB01
Table 1. Anthropometric and pulmonary function data

goto top of outline Changes in Pulmonary Function, Cardiopulmonary Exercise Capacity and Health-Related Quality of Life

Between-group comparisons of changes in pulmonary function, health-related quality of life and cardiopulmonary exercise capacity over the 4 weeks of pulmonary rehabilitation are shown in table 2. There was no change in lung function test results during the 4-week program in any of the groups, and the groups did not differ (fig. 1).

TAB02
Table 2. Changes of pulmonary function,cardiopulmonary exercise capacity and health-related quality of life

FIG01
Fig. 1. There was no statistically significant difference in the change of FEV1 between the RBF group (left) and the control group (right) after the 4 weeks of pulmonary rehabilitation.

Cardiopulmonary exercise capacity (6MWD) over the 4 weeks of pulmonary rehabilitation showed no significant differences between the groups (fig. 2). Within-group comparison for both study groups revealed a significant improvement in exercise capacity over the 4 weeks of pulmonary rehabilitation (fig. 2): the 6-min walking distance increased in both groups [RBF group: Δ6MWD = +23.63 (30.70) m, p = 0.002** vs. control group: Δ6MWD = +36.21 (43.54) m, p = 0.0005**].

FIG02
Fig. 2. There was no statistically significant difference in the change of cardiopulmonary exercise capacity as assessed by the 6MWD between the RBF group (left) and the control group (right) after the 4 weeks of pulmonary rehabilitation. Within both groups, there was a statistically significant improvement in 6MWD after pulmonary rehabilitation. ** = highly significant.

No significant differences were found in the quality of life between the two groups (fig. 3). Within-group comparisons for both study groups showed highly significant improvements in health-related quality of life after 4 weeks of pulmonary rehabilitation [RBF group: ΔCRQ score = +0.64 (0.85), p < 0.001** vs. control group: ΔCRQ score = +0.48 (0.85), p < 0.001**].

FIG03
Fig. 3. There was no statistically significant difference in the change of health-related quality of life as assessed by the CRQ between the RBF group (left) and the control group (right). A statistically significant improvement in health-related quality of life was observed in both groups after 4 weeks. ** = highly significant.

goto top of outline Changes in Cardiac Autonomic Function

Between-group statistical comparisons of improvements in time and frequency domain measures of parasympathetic-induced HRV are shown in table 3. No significant differences between changes in the mean values of R-R interval and R-R interval variability were found between both groups.

TAB03
Table 3. Changes of R-R interval and R-R interval variability

Within-group comparisons analyses showed improvements in the measurements of parasympathetic-induced HRV in both time and frequency domains (table 3; fig. 4). However, compared to baseline, no significant differences in any measurement of parasympathetic-induced HRV in frequency domains were found over the 4 weeks of pulmonary rehabilitation in the control group. Only the RBF group showed significant improvements in resting SDNN (ms) over the 4 weeks of pulmonary rehabilitation; SDNN increased from 32.0 (23.7) ms to 48.0 (52.8) ms (p = 0.037*).

FIG04
Fig. 4. There was no statistically significant difference in the change of cardiac autonomic function as assessed by rMSSD between the RBF group (left) and the control group (right).

 

goto top of outline Discussion

This is the first RCT comparing the effects of a 4-week rehabilitation program including controlled breathing using respiratory biofeedback to a 4-week rehabilitation program alone on pulmonary function (pulmonary function tests), cardiopulmonary exercise capacity, health-related quality of life and cardiac autonomic modulation. The initial hypothesis is not corroborated by the present observations; controlled breathing using a technique of RBF does not produce additional benefits compared to conventional pulmonary rehabilitation programs.

goto top of outline Pulmonary Function, Health-Related Quality of Life and Cardiopulmonary Exercise Capacity

It has been established that pulmonary rehabilitation in patients with COPD results in increased exercise tolerance, peripheral muscle force and health-related quality of life without any effects on pulmonary function or arterial blood gas levels [40,41,42,43]. Accordingly, we found significant improvements in both health-related quality of live (Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire) and exercise tolerance (6MWD) but not on any pulmonary function parameters reflecting airflow limitation, inspiratory lung capacity or lung hyperinflation over the 4 weeks of pulmonary rehabilitation.

Reviewing of the literature on controlled breathing techniques, such as DB, PLB and prolonged exhalation in patients with COPD, reveals that the use of each of these modalities has certain clinical benefits: PLB appears to be an effective way to decrease dyspnoea [12,13], improve the walking distance in the 6MWT [13] and improve gas exchange [15,44]. Furthermore, PLB has been shown to provide sustained improvement in exertional dyspnoea and physical performance [45]. DB in patients with COPD is associated with improvement of blood gases at the expense of a greater inspiratory muscle loading [16,23,46]. Several studies have demonstrated that COPD patients are able to voluntarily change their breathing pattern to more abdominal movement and less thoracic excursion [24,47,48]; however, no changes in ventilation distribution could be observed [48].

However, contradictory evidence exists about the effectiveness of controlled breathing techniques: Garrod [49] found that pursed lips breathing did not improve walking distance in nonspontaneous pursed-lips breathing COPD patients and Gosselink et al. [24] found that DB was associated with a decrease in mechanical efficiency in comparison with natural breathing in patients with COPD. Further analysis of the literature to date does not support the use of DB to improve ventilation, gas exchange, or the work of breathing in patients with COPD [57,58,59]. In summary, DB seems to have negative and positive effects, but the latter appears to be caused by simply slowing the respiratory rate [15].

To date, no trials have been published that investigated patients’ ability to train these breathing techniques all together and evaluate their overall effects over a prolonged period of time. In this study, no additional benefits from controlled breathing interventions in pulmonary function, health-related quality of life and cardiopulmonary exercise capacity were observed over the 4 weeks of pulmonary rehabilitation.

goto top of outline Cardiac Autonomic Function

Giardino et al. [22] found that after 10 weeks of controlled breathing, patients with COPD showed statistically and clinically significant improvements in parasympathetic tone [22]. These results suggest that breathing interventions per se can produce long-term changes in multiple organ systems that are affected by autonomic control. Although the improvement in parasympathetic-induced HRV in time domain of the RBF group in this study was significant, there seems to be no significant additional benefit from controlled breathing on parasympathetic tone over the 4 weeks of pulmonary rehabilitation.

Previous studies have established that patients with COPD have predominant sympathetic tone at rest, as assessed by increased resting heart rate and reduced HRV [50], and that the presence of cardiac autonomic dysfunction is generally associated with worse prognosis [51,52,53]. Predominant resting sympathetic tone in COPD may even have negative consequences on inflammation, cachexia and skeletal muscle dysfunction [54]. In accordance with this, we found that mean resting HR was elevated [89.1 (20.7) beats/min] and HRV was reduced [34.50 (31.10) ms] compared to published control data [55,56], underlining increased sympathetic tone at rest in the patients of this study.

HF power, SDNN and rMSSD are widely accepted to reflect the degree of parasympathetic induced modulation of heart rate [33,37,38]. Interestingly we found that, after 4 weeks of intensive cardio-pulmonary exercise training, all variables reflecting parasympathetic tone increased. The increase in SDNN of the RBF group was statistically significant. These results show that cardiac autonomic dysfunction can be positively influenced by intensive physical exercise training in patients with COPD. However, the pathophysiological mechanism underlying the substantially enhanced resting parasympathetic tone due to cardiopulmonary exercise training in patients with COPD remains unclear.

goto top of outline Limitations of the Study

It should be stressed that a number of patients found it difficult to change their breathing pattern during exercise performance. The controlled breathing techniques used in this study might be more beneficial if trained separately. It could be possible that pursed-lips breathing might be counteracted by those which might increase the work of breathing, such as deep DB [24]. In addition, a number of patients found it difficult to change their breathing pattern during exercise performance and thus the controlled breathing techniques used in this study may be more effective if trained separately rather than in combination. Furthermore, we cannot exclude that controlled breathing has some long-term effects. As rehabilitation is a relatively powerful intervention, it is difficult to secure improvements over and above those observed by rehabilitation alone. Some clinically relevant parameters were not assessed, that is, tidal volume, inspiration time/expiration time ratio and dynamic hyperinflation during exercise; thus we cannot exclude that controlled breathing has a positive effect on hyperinflation. Future studies should assess the effects of controlled breathing on dynamic hyperinflation and assess the long-term effects of controlled breathing. Long-term effects of controlled breathing might be helpful to develop appropriate therapeutic strategies and to improve long-term therapeutic management in COPD.

The number of patients included in our study was relatively small (n = 40). However, the 95% confidence intervals of the difference in ΔFEV1 between the two groups were –100 to 80 ml, thus we have excluded a significantly larger ΔFEV1 in the RBF group of more than 80 ml which is within the range of the minimal clinical importance. Similarly, the 95% confidence intervals of the difference in Δ6MWD between the two groups were –37 to 12 m, thus we have excluded a significantly larger Δ6MWD in the RBF group of more than 12 m, again well within the range of the minimal clinical importance.

 

goto top of outline Conclusions

The initial hypothesis is not corroborated by the present observations that controlled breathing sessions using a technique of RBF has any influence on pulmonary function, cardiopulmonary exercise capacity, health-related quality of life and cardiac autonomic function. The improvements on resting HRV observed in both groups show that cardiac autonomic dysfunction can be positively influenced by 4 weeks of intensive physical exercise training in patients with COPD.

 

goto top of outline Financial Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

None of the authors has a conflict of interest related to the content of the manuscript.


 goto top of outline References
  1. O’Donell DE, Lavenesiana P: Physiology and consequences of lung hyperinflation in COPD. Eur Respir Rev 2006;100:61–67 & 1993;148:1351–1357.

    External Resources

  2. Simpson K, Killian K, McCartney N, Stubbing DG, Jones NL: Randomized controlled trial of weightlifting exercise in patients with chronic airflow limitation. Thorax 1992;47:70–75.
  3. Decramer M, Gosselink R, Troosters T, Verschueren M, Evers G: Muscle weakness is related to utilization of health care resources in COPD patients. Eur Respir J 1997;10:417–423.
  4. Garcia-Aymerich J, Lange P, Benet M, Schnohr P, Anto JM: Regular physical activity reduces hospital admission and mortality in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a population based cohort study. Thorax 2006;61:772–778.
  5. Potter WA, Olafsson S, Hyatt RE: Ventilatory mechanics and expiratory flow limitation during exercise in patients with obstructive lung disease. J. Clin Invest 1971;50:910–919.
  6. Mak VHF, Bugler JR, Roberts CM, Spiro SG: Effect of arterial oxygen desaturation on six minute walk distance, perceived effort, and perceived breathlessness in patients with airflow limitation. Thorax 1993;48:33–38.
  7. Wijkstra PJ, TenVergert EM, van der Mark TW, Postma DS, van Altena R, Kraan J, Koëter GH: Relation of lung function, maximal inspiratory pressure, dyspnoea, and quality of life with exercise capacity in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Thorax 1994;49:468–472.
  8. Man WD, Kemp P, Moxham J: Exercise and muscle dysfunction in COPD: implications for pulmonary rehabilitation. Clinc Sci 2009;117:281–291.
  9. Seymour JM, Moore L, Jolley CJ: Outpatient pulmonary rehabilitation following acute exacerbations of COPD. Thorax 2010;65:423–428.
  10. Ries AL, Make BJ, Lee SM, Krasna MJ, Bartels M, Crouch R, Fishman AP: The effects of pulmonary rehabilitation in the national emphysema treatment trial. Chest 2005;128:3799–3809.
  11. National Emphysema Treatment Trial Research Group. The National Emphysema Treatment Trial – How Strong Is the Evidence? N Engl J Med 2003;348:2055–2056.
  12. Bianchi R, Gigliotti F, Romagnoli I, et al: Chest Wall Kinematics and Breathlessness During Pursed-Lip Breathing in Patients With COPD. Chest 2004;125:459–465.
  13. Steier J, Wessendorf TE, Teschler S, Teschler H: Cardiorespiratory effects of pursed-lips-breathing during 6-minute-walk-test in patients with severe COPD. Physioscience 2008;4:120–124.

    External Resources

  14. Barach AL: Physiologic advantages of grunting, groaning, and pursed-lip breathing: Adaptive symptoms related to the development of continuous positive pressure breathing. Bull N.Y. Acad Med 1973;49:666–673.
  15. Dechman G, Wilson CR: Evidence underlying breathing retraining in people with stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Phys Ther 2004;84:1189–1197.
  16. Vitacca M, Clini E, Bianchi L, Ambrosino N: Acute effects of deep diaphragmatic breathing in COPD patients with chronic respiratory insufficiency. Eur Respir J 1998;11:408–415.
  17. Maltais F, Leblanc P, Jobin J: Intensity of training and physiologic adaptation in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1997;15:555–561.
  18. Bekkering GE, Hendriks HJM, Paterson WJ: Guidelines for physiotherapeutic management in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Phys Ther Rev 2000;5:559–574.

    External Resources

  19. Puhan MA, Schünemann HJ, Frey M: How should COPD patients exercise during respiratory rehabilitation? Comparison of exercise modalities and intensities to treat skeletal muscle dysfunction. Thorax 2005;60:367–375.
  20. Sitzman J, Kamiya J, Johnston J: Biofeedback training for reduced respiratory rate in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a preliminary study. Nurs Res 1983;32:218–223.
  21. Lehrer P, Smetankin A, Potapova T: Respiratory sinus arrhythmia biofeedback therapy for asthma: a report of 20 unmedicated pediatric cases using the Smetankin methode. Appl Psychophysiol Biofeedback 2000;25:193–200.
  22. Giardino ND, Chan L, Borson S: Combined heart rate variability and pulse oximetry biofeedback for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: preliminary findings. Appl Psychophysiol Biofeedback 2004;29:121–133.
  23. Gosselink R: Controlled breathing and dyspnea in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). J Rehabil Res Dev 2003;40:25–34.
  24. Gosselink RAAM, Wagenaar RC, Rijswijk H: Diaphragmatic breathing reduces efficiency of breathing in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1995;151:1136–1142.
  25. Miller MR, Hankinson J, Brusasco V, Burgos F, Casaburi R, Coates A, Crapo R, Enright P, Grinten CPM van der, Gustafsson P, Jensen R, Johnson DC, MacIntyre N, McKay R, Navajas D, Pedersen OF, Pellegrino R, Viegi G, Wanger J: Series ‘ATS/ERS Task Force: Standardisation of spirometry. Eur Respir J 2005;26:319–338.
  26. Miller MR, Crapo R, Hankinson J, Brusasco V, Burgos F, Casaburi R, Coates A, Enright P, van der Grinten CP, Gustafsson P, Jensen R, Johnson DC, MacIntyre N, McKay R, Navajas D, Pedersen OF, Pellegrino R, Viegi G, Wanger J: General considerations for lung function testing. Eur Respir J 2005;26:153–161.
  27. Troosters T, Gosselink R, Decramer M: Six minute walking distance in healthy elderly subjects. Eur Respir J 1999;14:270–274.
  28. American Thoracic Society: ATS statement: guidelines for the six-minute walk test. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2002;166:111–117.
  29. Kroidl RF, Schwarz S, Lehnigk B: Kursbuch Spiroergometrie. Stuttgart, Georg Thieme Verlag, 2007, p 21.
  30. Guyatt GH, Pugsley SO, Sullivan MJ, Thompson PJ, Berman L, Jones NJ: Effect of encouragement on walking test performance. Thorax 1984;39:818–822.
  31. Redelmeier DA, Goldstein RS, Min ST: Spirometry and dyspnoea in patients with COPD: when small differences mean little. Chest 1996;109:1163–1168.
  32. Juniper EF, Guyatt GH, Willan A: Determining a minimal important change in a disease-specific quality of life questionnaire. J Clin Epidemiol 1994;47:81–87.
  33. American Heart Association: Heart rate variability. Standards of measurement, physiological interpretation, and clinical use. Eur Heart J 1996;17:354–381.
  34. Rimoldi O, Pierini S, Ferrari A, Cerutti S, Pagani V, Malliani A: Analysis of short-term oscillations of R-R and arterial pressure in conscious dogs. Am J Physiol 1990;258:967–976.
  35. Persson PB: Modulation of cardiovascular control mechanisms and their interaction. Physiol Rev 1996;76:193–244.
  36. Butler GC, Naughton MT, Rahman MA, Bradley TD, Floras JS: Continuous positive airway pressure increases heart rate variability in congestive heart failure. Am Coll Cardiol 1995;25:672–679.
  37. Stein PK, Kleiger RE: Insights from the study of heart rate variability. Annurev Med 1999;50:249–261.
  38. Stein PK: Inferring vagal tone from heart rate variability. Psychosom Med 1994;56:577–578.
  39. Markus KU: Herzschlaglängenfolgen während Taktatmung als Marker der kardiorespiratorischen Innervation. Aachen, 2003, p 9.
  40. Costes F, Roche F, Pichot V, Vergnon JM, Garet M, Barthelemy JC: Influence of exercise training on cardiac baroflex sensitivity in patients with COPD. Eur Respir J 2004;23:396–401.
  41. Salman G, Mosier M, Beasley B, Calkins D: Rehabilitation for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Gen Intern Med 2003;18:213–221.
  42. Man WD, Polkey MI, Donaldson N: Community pulmonary rehabilitation after hospitalisation for acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: randomised controlled study. BMJ 2004;329:1209.
  43. Seymour J, Moore L, Jolley CJ: Outpatient pulmonary rehabilitation following acute exacerbations of COPD. Thorax 2010;65:423–428.
  44. Breslin EH: The pattern of respiratory muscle recruitment during pursed-lips breathing COPD. Chest 1992;101:75–78.
  45. Nield MA, Soo Soo GW, Roper JM: Efficacy of Pursed-Lips Breathing: A breathing pattern retraining strategy for dyspnea reduction. J Cardiopulm Rehabil Prev 2007;27–4:237–244.
  46. O’Donnell DE: Assessment and management of dyspnea in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; in Similowski T, Whitelaw WA, Derenne J-P (eds): Clinical management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. New York, Marcel Dekker, 2002, pp 113–170.
  47. Sackner MA, Gonzales HF, Jenouri G: Effects of abdominal and thoracic breathing on breathing pattern components in normal subjects and in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Am Rev Respir Dis 1984;130:584–587.
  48. Grimby G, Oxhoj H, Bake B: Effects of abdominal breathing on distribution of ventilation in obstructive lung disease. Clin Sci Mol Med 1975;48:193–199.
  49. Garrod R, et al: An evaluation of the acute impact of pursed lips breathing on walking distance in nonspontaneous pursed lips breathing chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients. Chron Resp Dis 2005;2:67–72.
  50. Bartels MN, Jelic S, Ngai P. Basner RC, DeMeersman RE: High-frequency modulation of heart rate variability during exercise in patients with COPD. Chest 2003;124:863–869.
  51. Stein PK, Nelson P, Rottman JN, Howard D, Ward SM, Kleiger RE, Senior RM: Heart rate variability reflects severity of COPD in PiZ α1-antitrypsin deficiency. Chest 1998;113:327–333.
  52. Stewart AG, Waterhouse JC, Howard P: Cardiovascular autonomic nerve function in patients with hypoxaemic chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Eur Respir J 1991;4:1207–1214.
  53. Volterrani M, Scalvini S, Mazzuero G: Decreased heart rate variability in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Chest 1994;106:1432–1437.
  54. Pinsky MR: Cardiovascular Issues in respiratory care. Chest 2005;128:592–597.

    External Resources

  55. Kuo TB, Lin T, Yang CC, Li CL, Chen CF, Chou P: Effect of aging on gender differences in neural control of heart rate. Am J Physiol 1999;277:233–239.
  56. Sinnreich R, Kark JD, Friedlander Y, Sapoznikov D, Luria MH: Five minute recordings of heart rate variability for population studies: repeatability and age – sex characteristics. Heart 1998;80:156–162.
  57. Gouilly P, Conil P, Dubreuil C, Guénard H, Palomba B, Hayot M: Practical methods for controlled diaphragmatic breathing in 2009: proposals for a consensus. Rev Mal Respir 2009;26:537–546.
  58. Cahalin LP, Braga M, Matsuo Y, Hernandez ED: Efficacy of diaphragmatic breathing in persons with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a review of the literature. J Cardiopulm Rehabil 2002;22:7–21.
  59. Cahalin LP, Hernandez ED, Matsuo Y: Diaphragmatic breathing training: further investigation needed. Phys Ther 2005;85:369–370.

    External Resources

  60. Stein PK, Nelson P, Rottman JN, Howard D, Ward SM, Kleiger RE, Senior RM: Heart rate variability reflects severity of COPD in PiZ α1-antitrypsin deficiency. Chest 1998;113;327–333.

 goto top of outline Author Contacts

Dr. rer. medic. Arnoldus J.R. van Gestel
Zurich University of Applied Sciences
Technikumstrasse 71
CH–8401 Winterthur (Switzerland)
Tel. +41 79 833 8275, E-Mail vrns@zhaw.ch


 goto top of outline Article Information

ClinicalTrials.gov: Effects of breathing retraining in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01175265.

Received: October 21, 2010
Accepted after revision: December 21, 2010
Published online: April 7, 2011
Number of Print Pages : 10
Number of Figures : 4, Number of Tables : 3, Number of References : 60


 goto top of outline Publication Details

Respiration (Official Journal of the European Association for Bronchology and Interventional Pulmonology (EAB) and the Swiss Society for Pneumology (SGP))

Vol. 83, No. 2, Year 2012 (Cover Date: January 2012)

Journal Editor: Bolliger C.T. (Cape Town)
ISSN: 0025-7931 (Print), eISSN: 1423-0356 (Online)

For additional information: http://www.karger.com/RES


Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer

Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher or, in the case of photocopying, direct payment of a specified fee to the Copyright Clearance Center.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in goverment regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.