Aim: Nurses are well-qualified to deliver integrative complementary therapy interventions, a holistic approach to assist individuals experiencing anxiety and stress. Self-regulated, controlled breathing exercises (a clinical approach) are reported to decrease anxiety and increase stress tolerance. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the effectiveness of breathing exercise interventions on the psychological and physiologic outcomes of anxiety and stress among adults and assess the state of the science in the post-COVID-19 population. Methods: A systematic review was conducted, and four scientific databases were searched: PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, and Web of Science. Inclusion criteria included: (1) peer-reviewed studies, (2) adults over 18, (3) breathing exercise interventions, and (4) anxiety or stress as outcomes. Results: Out of 309 studies identified, 19 were included. Twelve reported significant improvements in anxiety and nine reported significant improvements in stress following varying breathing exercise interventions (p < .05). No adverse events were reported. Conclusions: Breathing exercises were found to be effective in reducing anxiety and stress in adults, however, there continues to be limited evidence that includes large randomized controlled trials. Breathing exercises are a holistic care approach that can be safely implemented by nurses to decrease symptomatology among adults, including the post-COVID population.

UNASSIGNED: Postoperative recovery in lung cancer patients is a complex process, where breathing exercises may play a crucial role in enhancing pulmonary function and quality of life (QoL). This study systematically reviews and meta-analyzes the impact of breathing exercises on post-surgical lung function and QoL in lung cancer patients.
UNASSIGNED: An extensive literature search was conducted across PubMed, Cochrane, Web of Science, and Embase databases using terms like \"Lung Neoplasms\", \"breathing exercises\", and \"randomized controlled trial\", supplemented by Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) and free words. The Cochrane risk of bias tool was used for quality assessment. A systematic review and meta-analysis on the effects of breathing exercises post-lung cancer surgery followed by data extraction and quality evaluation.
UNASSIGNED: From 384 retrieved studies, 10 met the inclusion criteria and were selected for detailed analysis. The main outcomes assessed were postoperative pulmonary function indices and QoL measures. The majority of studies were deemed \'low risk\' for random sequence generation and allocation concealment. However, due to the nature of the interventions, blinding was a \'high risk\' in most cases. The meta-analysis revealed significant improvements in key pulmonary function indices: forced vital capacity (FVC%) increased by an average of 1.73%, maximal voluntary ventilation (MVV) improved by 7.58 L/min, and maximal inspiratory pressure (MIP) enhanced by 0.95 cmH2O. Additionally, there was a notable alleviation of postoperative dyspnea and an enhancement in QoL, with anxiety scores decreasing by an average of 3.42 points and complication rates reducing correspondingly. However, the interventions did not significantly affect physical activity levels or performance on the 6-minute walk test (6WMT), with effect sizes for these outcomes being non-significant.
UNASSIGNED: This study indicates that breathing exercises significantly improve postoperative pulmonary function and QoL in lung cancer patients. Future research should delve into the mechanisms behind these exercises and evaluate their long-term rehabilitation effects. Customized programs could further optimize recovery and enhance patient QoL.

UNASSIGNED: To determine the effectiveness of breathing techniques in the management of asthma.
METHODS: The systematic review was conducted from July 2021 to August 2022, and comprised search on PubMed, Google Scholar, and MEDLINE databases using the population-intervention-control-outcomes format and Boolean operators. Relevant randomised controlled trials published in the English language in the preceding 10 years were included. The last literature search was done on January 15, 2022. To evaluate the bias in studies, the Cochrane risk of bias tool was used. PEDro scale was used to assess the quality of the trials analysed.
RESULTS: Of the 250 studies initially identified, 11(4.4%) random controlled trials were analysed in detail. The quality of methodology was high, and the studies reported significant improvement with the use of breathing techniques in symptoms of asthma and quality of life along with a decrease in the use of bronchodilators.
UNASSIGNED: Literature supported the use of breathing techniques in the management of asthma.

OBJECTIVE: Respiratory muscle training (RMT) is considered an effective tool to improve cardiorespiratory limitations in athletes. The goals of this systematic review were to explore the role of RMT and its implementation within sport rehabilitation programs in para-athletes.
METHODS: Several databases were searched until January 2024. Eligible studies were independently reviewed by 2 reviewers. Quality assessment was made using the PEDro scale and version 2 of the Cochrane Risk-of-Bias Tool for Randomized Trials. Eight studies (a total of 108 participants) were selected for the analysis.
RESULTS: Five studies preferred using resistive loading, while 2 studies used normocapnic hyperpnea, and 1 study used threshold inspiratory muscle training. Respiratory functions (respiratory muscle strength and endurance, spirometry measures) and exercise performance were assessed as the main outcomes. Significant increases in respiratory muscle strength were reported in 5 studies. Two studies observed improvement in respiratory muscle endurance and 3 studies reported increased exercise capacity.
CONCLUSIONS: This review suggests that although RMT can enhance respiratory muscle strength and endurance, it should not be considered the primary method for boosting the exercise performance of para-athletes. Additional research is necessary to explore the impact of various RMT techniques on different outcomes from the perspective of sport rehabilitation in para-athletes.

Background and objectives: Mechanical ventilation is often used in intensive care units to assist patients\' breathing. This often leads to respiratory muscle weakness and diaphragmatic dysfunction, causing weaning difficulties. Inspiratory muscle training (IMT) has been found to be beneficial in increasing inspiratory muscle strength and facilitating weaning. Over the years, different protocols and devices have been used. Materials and Methods: The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to investigate the effectiveness of low-medium (LM-IMT) and high-intensity (H-IMT) threshold inspiratory muscle training in critically ill patients. A systematic literature search was performed for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in the electronic databases Google Scholar, PubMed, Scopus, and Science Direct. The search involved screening for studies examining the effectiveness of two different intensities of threshold IMT in critically ill patients published the last 10 years. The Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale was chosen as the tool to assess the quality of studies. A meta-analysis was performed where possible. Results: Fourteen studies were included in the systematic review, with five of them having high methodological quality. Conclusions: When examining LM-IMT and H-IMT though, neither was able to reach statistically significant improvement in their maximal inspiratory pressure (MIP), while LM-IMT reached it in terms of weaning duration. Additionally, no statistical difference was noticed in the duration of mechanical ventilation. The application of IMT is recommended to ICU patients in order to prevent diaphragmatic dysfunction and facilitate weaning from mechanical ventilation. Therefore, further research as well as additional RCTs regarding different protocols are needed to enhance its effectiveness.

BACKGROUND: Enhancing lung function can significantly improve daily life functionality for children with cerebral palsy, leading to increased interest in respiratory physiotherapy training devices in clinical practice. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of devices (inspiratory muscle training and feedback devices) for improving pulmonary function through various respiratory parameters.
METHODS: A systematic review with meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials was conducted in seven databases up until May 2023. The included studies focused on training inspiratory muscle function using specific devices (inspiratory muscle training and feedback devices) in children with cerebral palsy. The main outcomes were maximum expiratory pressure and maximum inspiratory pressure. Secondary outcomes included forced vital capacity, forced expiratory volume in 1 s, peak expiratory flow, and the Tiffenau index. The effects of respiratory treatment were calculated through the estimation of the effect size and its 95% confidence intervals. The risk of bias in the included studies was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration\'s tool for assessing the risk of bias (RoB2).
RESULTS: Nine studies were included in the systematic review with meta-analysis, involving a total of 321 children aged between 6 and 18 years after secondary analyses were conducted. Feedback devices were found to be more effective in improving maximum expiratory pressure (effect size -0.604; confidence interval -1.368 to 0.161), peak expiratory flow, forced expiratory volume in 1 s, and forced vital capacity. Inspiratory muscle training devices yielded better effectiveness in improving maximum inspiratory pressure (effect size -0.500; confidence interval -1.259 to 0.259), the Tiffeneau index, and quality of life.
CONCLUSIONS: Both devices showed potential in improving pulmonary function in children with cerebral palsy. Further high-quality clinical trials are needed to determine the optimal dosage and the most beneficial device type for each pulmonary function parameter.

OBJECTIVE: This study was designed to synthesize the efficacy and safety of breathing exercises in interstitial lung disease (ILD) patients by reviewing the literature and comparing the impact of different control group types, ILD subtypes, breathing exercise action modes or methods, and intervention durations on clinical efficacy.
METHODS: Systematic searches were conducted across 9 electronic databases, including PubMed, to retrieve English and Chinese studies reporting on ILD patients from inception to February 12, 2024. Study selection and data extraction were independently conducted by two researchers. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. The data were analysed using RevMan 5.4 and STATA 17.0 software.
RESULTS: The search identified 25 studies. Compared to the control group, the breathing exercise group exhibited significantly improved lung function (FVC%pred: MD  =  3.46, 95%CI = 1.04 to 5.88; DLCO%pred: MD = 3.20, 95% CI = 2.91 to 3.48), dyspnoea (MRC or mMRC scale: MD = - 0.50, 95%CI = - 0.77 to - 0.22), exercise capacity (6MWD: MD = 32.65, 95% CI = 14.77 to 50.53), and HRQoL (SGRQ: MD = - 6.53, 95% CI = - 8.72 to - 4.34) in ILD patients. According to the subgroup analysis, significant improvements consistent with the overall results were observed in the control group with usual treatment. Compared with the control group, breathing exercises had varying degrees of improvement in the mixed diagnostic group, known-cause group, and fibrotic group of ILD patients; breathing exercises alone significantly improved DLCO%pred, MRC (or mMRC), and SGRQ; and the improvement in breathing exercises as part of pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) was more notable. Different durations of breathing exercise could promote the efficacy of different aspects of treatment for ILD patients.
CONCLUSIONS: Compared with usual treatment, breathing exercises can improve lung function, exercise capacity, and HRQoL in ILD patients, particularly without high requirements for intervention duration. The efficacy of breathing exercises varies for different ILD subtypes, and incorporating breathing exercises as part of PR can be more beneficial for ILD patients. No studies have shown significant risks for ILD patients engaging in breathing exercises.

BACKGROUND: The term \"post-COVID-19 condition\" refers to the symptomatology that appears between four to twelve weeks after Covid-19 infection. These symptoms can persist for weeks or even months, significantly diminishing the quality of life for affected individuals. The primary objective of this study was to assess the effectiveness of pulmonary rehabilitation programs and/or respiratory muscle training on respiratory sequelae in patients with post-COVID condition.
METHODS: The literature search was conducted in the following databases: PubMed, PEDro, Embase, Cochrane, Scopus, and Web of Science. Randomized clinical trials were included in which participants were aged 18 years or older. Articles were excluded if at least one of the therapies did not involve pulmonary rehabilitation or respiratory muscle training, if the participants were COVID positive, if studies lacked results, and finally, if interventions were conducted without supervision or at home. This review only encompasses supervised non-virtual interventions. This study adheres to the PRISMA statement and has been registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42023433843).
RESULTS: The outcomes obtained in the included studies are assessed across the following variables: Exercise capacity using the 6-minute walk test, Dyspnea, fatigue, Pulmonary function, Maximum inspiratory pressure, and Quality of life.
CONCLUSIONS: Despite the absence of a specific treatment at present, it was evident from this review that a well-structured pulmonary rehabilitation program that incorporates both aerobic and muscular strength exercises along with techniques and inspiratory muscle exercises was the most effective form of treatment.

UNASSIGNED: To date, it is unknown whether respiratory training interventions can benefit Long COVID-19 patients. The main objective was to analyze the effects of respiratory training on patients with Long COVID-19, concretely on respiratory muscle strength, lung function, dyspnea, and functional capacity.
UNASSIGNED: We performed a systematic review following PRISMA statement using PubMed, Scopus, and PEDro (last search November 2023). The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane tool. We included randomized controlled trials testing the effect of respiratory training interventions in Long COVID-19 patients versus no intervention, control, or placebo intervention. The data was pooled, and a meta-analysis was complete.
UNASSIGNED: We selected 7 studies, which included 572 patients. Meta-analysis results show significant differences in favor of respiratory training in respiratory muscle strength (MD = 13.71; 95% CI = 5.41; 22; p = 0.001), dyspnea (SDM = 1.39; 95% CI = 0.33; 2.46; p = 0.01) and functional capacity (SDM = 0.90; 95% CI = 0.37; 1.43; p = 0.0009), but not in lung function (MD = 0.28; 95%CI = -0.27; 0.83; p = 0.32).
UNASSIGNED: The results of this systematic review with meta-analysis suggest that respiratory training improves respiratory muscle strength and functional capacity in Long COVID-19 patients, as well as dyspnea if combined with therapeutic exercise. However, respiratory training does not improve lung function in these patients.
UNASSIGNED: CRD42022371820.

Introduction: Hypopressive exercise (HE) can be viewed as a mind-body activity, characterized by the integration of breath control and stretching postures. Proponents of HE claim that this type of training can offer potential therapeutic or health benefits. To date, there is no existing comprehensive published overview on HE. This scoping review aims to map and summarize the current literature reporting data on HE and identify key knowledge gaps and future research directions. Methods: This review considered studies that report on the immediate, short-, or long-term practice of HE regardless of condition, sex, age, and/or level of practice or physical condition. Any context or setting was considered for inclusion. This review was performed in accordance with the methodological framework proposed by the Joanna Briggs Institute and by Arksey and O\'Malley. MEDLINE, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched from inception up to July 2023. Literature was mapped following the Patterns-Advances-Gaps-Evidence for Practice Recommendations framework to identify patterns and inform practice. Results: In total, 87 studies were identified that reported on the following themes: (1) therapeutic application of a short- or long-term HE programs (n = 56); (2) physiologic and physical responsiveness to a short- or long-term HE programs (n = 22); (3) psychologic and behavioral response to a short-term HE program (n = 14); and (4) acute or immediate physiological responses (n = 21). Literature gaps included poor methodological design, incomplete reporting of intervention, lack of male participants, and exploration of muscle groups distinct from the pelvic floor and abdominal muscles. Discussion: There is a need for high-quality randomized controlled trials, adherence to reporting guidelines on exercise, and the use of active control groups to verify clinical significance, the dose response, and health applications of HE.