Abstract
Maximal inspiratory pressure (MIP) is commonly measured by respiratory care practitioners to determine a patient's respiratory-muscle strength and/or ability to maintain unassisted ventilation. We compared the results of three different methods for measuring MIP. METHODS: In Part 1 of the study, we compared MIP values obtained by Methods I and II in 75 patients. Method I used an aneroid manometer connected to a Y-piece, and Method II used a modified Y-piece that included a one-way valve to permit expiration after airway occlusion. In Part 2 of the study, we compared MIP measurements (n = 50) made by Method II and Method III; Method III used the negative inspiratory pressure function of the Puritan-Bennett 7200a ventilator. RESULTS: Part 1-Using Method II resulted in a consistently higher MIP (39 ± 9 cm H2O) [3.8 ± 0.9 kPa] (mean ± SD) than did using Method I (28 ± 11 cm H2O) [2.7 ± 1.1 kPa]; the difference was statistically significant (p < 0.027). There were no differences between Methods I and II in number of efforts or time to reach MIP. Part 2-MIP measured by Method III (7200a) was 17 ± 9 cm H2O [1.7 ± 0.9 kPa], and was consistently less than MIP measured by Method II (39 ± 11 cm H2O) [3.8 ± 1.1 kPa]; the difference was statistically significant (p < 0.0067). The time to reach MIP after airway occlusion in this study ranged from 12 to 25 seconds (mean, 17 s). CONCLUSIONS: The addition of a one-way valve to the MIP-measurement system results in more accurate estimation of respiratory-muscle strength. The time to reach airway occlusion is at least 15 seconds. MIP measured by the 7200a ventilator grossly underestimates true MIP.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
