2.2. Experimental Design and Procedure
diaphragmatic and nasal breathing, hyperventilation, shortness of breath
AIDS
The study was a prospective randomized trial with two groups that compared the nonpharmacological interventions TLT and IRT with LTST. GPre- and postintervention assessments were all conducted by an expert with special respiratory training. During the 10-week program, the two groups participated in 30 to 40 min sessions three times in a week. The sessions emphasized breathing rhythm regulation, increasing LTST, increasing expiratory time, boosting diaphragmatic and nasal breathing, and slowing the respiratory flow. Each session was initiated with activities to warm up the lower torso and thoracic wall muscles. LTST was performed with TLT and IRT and with diaphragmatic and pursed-lip breathing. By utilizing the TLT (Power breathe, HaB International, Southam, UK), the patients were instructed to breathe through their mouths and clip their noses shut, and they were encouraged to exhale “the whole air content of their lungs.” Each breath was 40–60% of maximal inspiratory pressure (PImax), and LTST was 40%–60% of PImax. The patients were encouraged to maintain a modest breathing frequency to minimize hyperventilation and to gradually increase the resistive load until 40 breaths approximated the inspiratory muscle tolerance limit. To ensure that patients adhered to the training requirements of their training interventions, they were required to visit the laboratory monthly to complete their tests.The differences between TLT and LTST machine are as follows:
There is a mask that covers both mouth and nose. Inhalation and exhalation are taken inside the mask without exposure to the air pollutants of the external environment. In contrast, threshold loading device is placed in the mouth onlyTwo side filters filter the air from dust and other pollutants entering the lungs. While threshold loading device does not have a filterThere is a pulley for timing the intensity from zero to 100%, which is suitable for all degrees of shortness of breath, while the intensity of the threshold loading device is 40% which is unsuitable for all degrees of dyspneaThe innovative device works with electricity or batteries, and this aids the patient in the process of inhaling air more efficiently. However, unfortunately, we do not find that in the threshold loading deviceThe innovative device can be carried back without affecting the patient's movement. However, simultaneously, the threshold loading device must be held by a hand, which may affect patient movementThe innovative device can be linked to a computer to read the percentage of inhaled oxygen and exhaled carbon dioxide. We do not find that in the threshold loading deviceThe innovative device has two gates, one for air entry and the other for air exit, while the threshold loading device has one gate.