الفهرس 
Title : Impact of lung boost exerciser on lung compliance and quality of life in elderly
AbstractOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 154 |  |  |
| | | from | 154 | | |
Abstract
Respiratory problems are the second commonest cause of severe disability among community-dwelling elderly people. Respiratory rehabilitation attempts to return patients with respiratory disability to as normal life as possible with independence in life activities. Exercise training can reduce dyspnea, and improve exercise tolerance, functional capacity and quality of life. Purpose: to assess the effect of lung boost exerciser on lung compliance and quality of life in elderly. Subjects: Sixty subjects both genders (their ages ranged from 70 to 80 years they were selected randomly from (Dar el-Yasmeen institution for elderly people and special needs). Methods: subjects were randomly assigned into two equal groups. group A: thirty subjects (12 males and 18 females) with a mean age of ) 74.6 ± 3.25( who received traditional chest physical therapy program in form of breathing exercises (diaphragmatic breathing and pursed-lip breathing) and Exercises connected with respiration only (three times / week, for twelve weeks).group B: thirty subjects (17 males and 13 females) with a mean age of )75.36 ± 3.44( who received traditional chest physical therapy program. In form of breathing exercises (diaphragmatic breathing and pursed-lip breathing) plus Lung boost exerciser (three times / week, for twelve weeks). Subjects were evaluated pre and post training for lung compliance, functional aerobic capacity, diaphragmatic excursion and quality of life. Results: (group A) (shown increase in all parameters) lung compliance (FVC 2.83 %, FEV1 3.42%, MIP 7.67%), 6MWT 26.44%, diaphragmatic excursion 46.95%, and quality of life 16.54%. (group B) (Showed increase in all parameters) lung compliance (FVC 7.56%, FEV1 7.63%, MIP 10.37%), 6MWT 33.93%, diaphragmatic excursion 66.85%, and quality of life 49.33%. Conclusions: Subjects of both groups showed improvement in all measured variables.In favor for group B