Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorDarling-White, Meghan
dc.date.accessioned2022-03-09T22:51:19Z
dc.date.available2022-03-09T22:51:19Z
dc.date.issued2022-02-09
dc.identifier.citationDarling-White, M. (2022). Comparison of Respiratory Calibration Methods for the Estimation of Lung Volume in Children With and Without Neuromotor Disorders. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research : JSLHR.en_US
dc.identifier.issn1092-4388
dc.identifier.doi10.1044/2021_jslhr-21-00333
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10150/663526
dc.description.abstractPURPOSE: The primary purpose of this study was to validate common respiratory calibration methods for estimating lung volume in children. METHOD: Respiratory kinematic data were collected via inductive plethysmography from 81 typically developing children and nine children with neuromotor disorders. Correction factors for the rib cage and abdomen were calculated using three different methods: (a) least squares method with both rib cage and abdomen corrections (LsqRC/AB), (b) least squares method with rib cage correction only (LsqRC), and (c) a standard 2:1 rib-cage-to-abdomen ratio (Banzett). Correction factors for the LsqRC/AB and LsqRC methods were calculated with and without the use of the speech-like breathing calibration task. Lung volume estimation errors were calculated by comparing the estimated lung volumes based on the correction factors and the actual lung volumes acquired from a spirometer, normalized to each participant's vital capacity. RESULTS: For typically developing children, the LsqRC/AB method resulted in significantly smaller lung volume estimation errors compared with other methods. Lung volume estimation errors decreased as age increased for each method. For the children with neuromotor disorders, the LsqRC/AB and LsqRC methods resulted in significantly smaller lung volume estimation errors than the Banzett method but were not significantly different from one another. There were no significant differences in lung volume estimation errors for the LsqRC/AB and LsqRC methods when the correction factors were calculated with and without the speech-like breathing calibration task. CONCLUSION: The LsqRC/AB method exclusively utilizing the rest breathing calibration task is the most accurate and efficient respiratory calibration method for use with children with and without neuromotor disorders at this time.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherAmerican Speech Language Hearing Associationen_US
dc.rightsCopyright © 2022 American Speech-Language-Hearing Association.en_US
dc.rights.urihttp://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/en_US
dc.titleComparison of Respiratory Calibration Methods for the Estimation of Lung Volume in Children With and Without Neuromotor Disordersen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.eissn1558-9102
dc.contributor.departmentDepartment of Speech, Language, Hearing Sciences, University of Arizonaen_US
dc.identifier.journalJournal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHRen_US
dc.description.noteImmediate accessen_US
dc.description.collectioninformationThis item from the UA Faculty Publications collection is made available by the University of Arizona with support from the University of Arizona Libraries. If you have questions, please contact us at repository@u.library.arizona.edu.en_US
dc.eprint.versionFinal accepted manuscripten_US
dc.identifier.pii10.1044/2021_JSLHR-21-00333
dc.source.journaltitleJournal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research
dc.source.volume65
dc.source.issue2
dc.source.beginpage525
dc.source.endpage537
refterms.dateFOA2022-03-09T22:51:19Z


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
DarlingWhite.inpressJSLHR.pdf
Size:
615.4Kb
Format:
PDF
Description:
Final Accepted Manuscript

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record