Maximal inspiratory pressure is not a reliable test of inspiratory muscle strength in mechanically ventilated patients

A. S. Multz, T. K. Aldrich, David J. Prezant, J. P. Karpel, J. M. Hendler

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

62 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Maximal inspiratory pressure (MIP) is an important clinical method used to assess respiratory muscle strength. The reliability and reproducibility of this measurement in mechanically ventilated patients is not certain. In 14 stable, mechanically ventilated patients, capable of spontaneous inspiratory efforts, we assessed maximal inspiratory efforts using the technique originally described by Marini and associates. MIP was measured in triplicate, by one to five experienced investigators, on one to seven successive days, for a total of 396 determinations on 54 patient days. The coefficients of variation among the triplicate efforts averaged 12 ± 1%, indicating the test to be highly reproducible. There was significant variation among the MIP reported by different investigators studying the same patient on the same day (32 ± 4%). The differences between best MIP by different investigators averaged 12.6 ± 1.3 cm H2O (40 ± 4%). In 17 of 44 cases, one investigator placed MIP above -30 cm H2O, whereas another placed it below. ANOVA showed that MIP was significantly affected by investigator (p < 0.0001) as well as by patient (p < 0.0001). Because 'true' MIP must be equal to or greater than the best measured MIP, these data indicate that the MIP is commonly underestimated in patients receiving mechanical ventilation, even when standardized technique is used. Furthermore, our data show that reproducibility of triplicate MIP determination by a single observer does not indicate that the test is reliable.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)529-532
Number of pages4
JournalAmerican Review of Respiratory Disease
Volume142
Issue number3
StatePublished - 1990

Fingerprint

Muscle Strength
Research Personnel
Maximal Respiratory Pressures
Respiratory Muscles
Artificial Respiration
Analysis of Variance

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine

Cite this

Maximal inspiratory pressure is not a reliable test of inspiratory muscle strength in mechanically ventilated patients. / Multz, A. S.; Aldrich, T. K.; Prezant, David J.; Karpel, J. P.; Hendler, J. M.

In: American Review of Respiratory Disease, Vol. 142, No. 3, 1990, p. 529-532.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{6d484528a04e4613ba3a758043d74a3e,
title = "Maximal inspiratory pressure is not a reliable test of inspiratory muscle strength in mechanically ventilated patients",
abstract = "Maximal inspiratory pressure (MIP) is an important clinical method used to assess respiratory muscle strength. The reliability and reproducibility of this measurement in mechanically ventilated patients is not certain. In 14 stable, mechanically ventilated patients, capable of spontaneous inspiratory efforts, we assessed maximal inspiratory efforts using the technique originally described by Marini and associates. MIP was measured in triplicate, by one to five experienced investigators, on one to seven successive days, for a total of 396 determinations on 54 patient days. The coefficients of variation among the triplicate efforts averaged 12 ± 1{\%}, indicating the test to be highly reproducible. There was significant variation among the MIP reported by different investigators studying the same patient on the same day (32 ± 4{\%}). The differences between best MIP by different investigators averaged 12.6 ± 1.3 cm H2O (40 ± 4{\%}). In 17 of 44 cases, one investigator placed MIP above -30 cm H2O, whereas another placed it below. ANOVA showed that MIP was significantly affected by investigator (p < 0.0001) as well as by patient (p < 0.0001). Because 'true' MIP must be equal to or greater than the best measured MIP, these data indicate that the MIP is commonly underestimated in patients receiving mechanical ventilation, even when standardized technique is used. Furthermore, our data show that reproducibility of triplicate MIP determination by a single observer does not indicate that the test is reliable.",
author = "Multz, {A. S.} and Aldrich, {T. K.} and Prezant, {David J.} and Karpel, {J. P.} and Hendler, {J. M.}",
year = "1990",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "142",
pages = "529--532",
journal = "American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine",
issn = "1073-449X",
publisher = "American Thoracic Society",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Maximal inspiratory pressure is not a reliable test of inspiratory muscle strength in mechanically ventilated patients

AU - Multz, A. S.

AU - Aldrich, T. K.

AU - Prezant, David J.

AU - Karpel, J. P.

AU - Hendler, J. M.

PY - 1990

Y1 - 1990

N2 - Maximal inspiratory pressure (MIP) is an important clinical method used to assess respiratory muscle strength. The reliability and reproducibility of this measurement in mechanically ventilated patients is not certain. In 14 stable, mechanically ventilated patients, capable of spontaneous inspiratory efforts, we assessed maximal inspiratory efforts using the technique originally described by Marini and associates. MIP was measured in triplicate, by one to five experienced investigators, on one to seven successive days, for a total of 396 determinations on 54 patient days. The coefficients of variation among the triplicate efforts averaged 12 ± 1%, indicating the test to be highly reproducible. There was significant variation among the MIP reported by different investigators studying the same patient on the same day (32 ± 4%). The differences between best MIP by different investigators averaged 12.6 ± 1.3 cm H2O (40 ± 4%). In 17 of 44 cases, one investigator placed MIP above -30 cm H2O, whereas another placed it below. ANOVA showed that MIP was significantly affected by investigator (p < 0.0001) as well as by patient (p < 0.0001). Because 'true' MIP must be equal to or greater than the best measured MIP, these data indicate that the MIP is commonly underestimated in patients receiving mechanical ventilation, even when standardized technique is used. Furthermore, our data show that reproducibility of triplicate MIP determination by a single observer does not indicate that the test is reliable.

AB - Maximal inspiratory pressure (MIP) is an important clinical method used to assess respiratory muscle strength. The reliability and reproducibility of this measurement in mechanically ventilated patients is not certain. In 14 stable, mechanically ventilated patients, capable of spontaneous inspiratory efforts, we assessed maximal inspiratory efforts using the technique originally described by Marini and associates. MIP was measured in triplicate, by one to five experienced investigators, on one to seven successive days, for a total of 396 determinations on 54 patient days. The coefficients of variation among the triplicate efforts averaged 12 ± 1%, indicating the test to be highly reproducible. There was significant variation among the MIP reported by different investigators studying the same patient on the same day (32 ± 4%). The differences between best MIP by different investigators averaged 12.6 ± 1.3 cm H2O (40 ± 4%). In 17 of 44 cases, one investigator placed MIP above -30 cm H2O, whereas another placed it below. ANOVA showed that MIP was significantly affected by investigator (p < 0.0001) as well as by patient (p < 0.0001). Because 'true' MIP must be equal to or greater than the best measured MIP, these data indicate that the MIP is commonly underestimated in patients receiving mechanical ventilation, even when standardized technique is used. Furthermore, our data show that reproducibility of triplicate MIP determination by a single observer does not indicate that the test is reliable.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0025128319&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0025128319&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 2389903

AN - SCOPUS:0025128319

VL - 142

SP - 529

EP - 532

JO - American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine

JF - American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine

SN - 1073-449X

IS - 3

ER -