Abstract
Background Personalised airway clearance techniques are commonly recommended to augment mucus clearance in chronic suppurative lung diseases. It is unclear what current literature tells us about how airway clearance regimens should be personalised. This scoping review explores current research on airway clearance technique in chronic suppurative lung diseases, to establish the extent and type of guidance in this area, identify knowledge gaps and determine the factors which physiotherapists should consider when personalising airway clearance regimens.
Methods Systematic searching of online databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PEDro, Cochrane, Web of Science) was used to identify full-text publications in the last 25 years that described methods of personalising airway clearance techniques in chronic suppurative lung diseases. Items from the TIDieR framework provided a priori categories which were modified based on the initial data to develop a “Best-fit” framework for data charting. The findings were subsequently transformed into a personalisation model.
Results A broad range of publications were identified, most commonly general review papers (44%). The items identified were grouped into seven personalisation factors: physical, psychosocial, ACT type, procedures, dosage, response, and provider. As only two divergent models of airway clearance technique personalisation were found, the personalisation factors identified were then used to develop a model for physiotherapists.
Conclusions The personalisation of airway clearance regimens is widely discussed amongst current literature which provides a range of factors that should be considered. This review summarises the current literature, organising findings into a proposed airway clearance personalisation model, to provide clarity in this field.
Footnotes
This manuscript has recently been accepted for publication in the ERJ Open Research. It is published here in its accepted form prior to copyediting and typesetting by our production team. After these production processes are complete and the authors have approved the resulting proofs, the article will move to the latest issue of the ERJOR online. Please open or download the PDF to view this article.
Conflicts of interest: Lynne Schofield has received a grant from the National Institute for Health Research to undertake a Clinical Academic Fellowship.
Conflicts of interest: Sally Singh (SS) is a National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Senior Investigators. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NIHR, or The Department of Health and Social Care. SS is supported by the National Institute for Health Research Leicester Biomedical Research Centre. SS received an educational grant from Actegy Limited to support a PhD Fellow.
Conflicts of interest: Zarah Yousaf has nothing to disclosedeclares no conflicts of interest.
Conflicts of interest: Jim Wild has nothing to disclosedeclares no conflicts of interest.
Conflicts of interest: Dan Hind has nothing to disclosedeclares no conflicts of interest.
This is a PDF-only article. Please click on the PDF link above to read it.
- Received January 5, 2023.
- Accepted April 13, 2023.
- Copyright ©The authors 2023
This version is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial Licence 4.0. For commercial reproduction rights and permissions contact permissions{at}ersnet.org