CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 326Cystic Fibrosis Research AdvancesRespiratory and Cough-Related ResearchRespiratory Support and Mechanisms

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 127 of the 127 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Airway clearance techniques in neuromuscular disorders: A state of the art review

Open access
Chatwin, Michelle, Toussaint, Michel, Gonçalves, Miguel R., Sheers, Nicole, Mellies, Uwe, Gonzales-Bermejo, Jesus, Sancho, Jesus, Fauroux, Brigitte, Andersen, Tiina, Hov, Brit, Nygren-Bonnier, Malin, Lacombe, Matthieu, Pernet, Kurt, Kampelmacher, Mike, Devaux, Christian, Kinnett, Kathy, Sheehan, Daniel, Rao, Fabrizio, Villanova, Marcello, Berlowitz, David, Morrow, Brenda M.·2018·Respiratory Medicine
DOI 10.1016/j.rmed.2018.01.012
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

This is a unique state of the art review written by a group of 21 international recognized experts in the field that gathered during a meeting organized by the European Neuromuscular Centre (ENMC) in Naarden, March 2017. It systematically reports the entire evidence base for airway clearance techniques (ACTs) in both adults and children with neuromuscular disorders (NMD). We not only report randomised controlled trials, which in other systematic reviews conclude that there is a lack of evidence base to give an opinion, but also include case series and retrospective reviews of practice. For this review, we have classified ACTs as either proximal (cough augmentation) or peripheral (secretion mobilization). The review presents descriptions; standard definitions; the supporting evidence for and limitations of proximal and peripheral ACTs that are used in patients with NMD; as well as providing recommendations for objective measurements of efficacy, specifically for proximal ACTs. This state of the art review also highlights how ACTs may be adapted or modified for specific contexts (e.g. in people with bulbar insufficiency; children and infants) and recommends when and how each technique should be applied.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.rmed.2018.01.012

Cites

127 of 127 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Dail, 1951, 'Glossopharyngeal breathing' by paralysed patients, California Medcine, 75, 217
  2. AARC Clinical Practice Guidelines, 2010, Endotracheal suctioning of mechanically ventilated patients with artificial airways 2010, Respir. Care, 55, 758

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 326

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Chatwin, M., Toussaint, M., Gonçalves, M. R., Sheers, N., Mellies, U., Gonzales-Bermejo, J., Sancho, J., Fauroux, B., Andersen, T., Hov, B., Nygren-Bonnier, M., Lacombe, M., Pernet, K., Kampelmacher, M., Devaux, C., Kinnett, K., Sheehan, D., Rao, F., Villanova, M., Berlowitz, D., & Morrow, B. M.
Affiliations
  • Royal Brompton & Harefield NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
  • Universidade do Porto (PT)
  • Institute for Breathing and Sleep (AU)
  • University of Duisburg-Essen (DE)
  • Hôpital Necker-Enfants Malades (FR)
  • Haukeland University Hospital (NO)
  • Oslo University Hospital (NO)
  • Assistance Publique – Hôpitaux de Paris (FR)
  • University Medical Center Utrecht (NL)
  • Association Francaise contre les Myopathies (FR)
  • Women & Children's Hospital of Buffalo (US)
  • University of Milan (IT)
  • University of Cape Town (ZA)
Corresponding author
Chatwin, Michelle
ORCID
Venue
Respiratory Medicine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-03
Volume
136
Pages
98-110
ISSN
0954-6111 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.rmed.2018.01.012
OpenAlex
W2791843842
Cited by
325
References
127
Citations by year
2026: 31 · 2025: 45 · 2024: 45 · 2023: 58 · 2022: 45 · 2021: 35 · 2020: 29 · 2019: 26 · 2018: 11
FWCI
4.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Respiratory Medicine (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Universitätsbibliographie, Universität Duisburg-Essen (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • NIHR Respiratory Disease Biomedical Research Unit at the Royal Brompton and Harefield NHS Foundation Trust and Imperial College London
  • “Investissement d’Avenir” ANR-10-AIHU 06 of the French Government
  • ResMed via the Royal Brompton Hospital
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Cystic Fibrosis Research Advances
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Respiratory and Cough-Related Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Respiratory Support and Mechanisms
Keywords
airway clearance techniques, neuromuscular disorders, cough augmentation, secretion mobilization, infants and children, evidence base
MeSH terms
Inhalation, Cough, Humans, Lung Volume Measurements, Mucociliary Clearance, Neuromuscular Diseases, Respiration, Artificial, Respiratory Insufficiency, Respiratory Muscles

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review