Skip to main content
 

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Editor's Commentary
    • Coming Next Month
    • Archives
    • Top 10 Papers in 2020
  • Authors
    • Author Guidelines
    • Submit a Manuscript
  • Reviewers
    • Reviewer Information
    • Create Reviewer Account
    • Appreciation of Reviewers
  • CRCE
    • Through the Journal
    • JournalCasts
    • AARC University
    • PowerPoint Template
  • Open Forum
    • Call for Abstracts 2021
    • 2020 Abstracts
    • Previous Open Forums
  • Podcast
    • English
    • Español
    • Portugûes
    • 国语

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
American Association for Respiratory Care
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
American Association for Respiratory Care

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Editor's Commentary
    • Coming Next Month
    • Archives
    • Top 10 Papers in 2020
  • Authors
    • Author Guidelines
    • Submit a Manuscript
  • Reviewers
    • Reviewer Information
    • Create Reviewer Account
    • Appreciation of Reviewers
  • CRCE
    • Through the Journal
    • JournalCasts
    • AARC University
    • PowerPoint Template
  • Open Forum
    • Call for Abstracts 2021
    • 2020 Abstracts
    • Previous Open Forums
  • Podcast
    • English
    • Español
    • Portugûes
    • 国语
  • Follow aarc on Twitter
  • Visit aarc on Facebook
Research ArticleOriginal Research

Findings From the MATREX Study: A Treatment Protocol for the Delivery of Manual Chest Therapy in Respiratory Care

Jane Cross and Frances Elender on behalf of the MATREX Research Group
Respiratory Care August 2012, 57 (8) 1263-1266; DOI: https://doi.org/10.4187/respcare.01312
Jane Cross
School of Allied Health Professions, University of East Anglia, Norwich, Norfolk, United Kingdom.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: [email protected]
Frances Elender
School of Allied Health Professions, University of East Anglia, Norwich, Norfolk, United Kingdom.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Supplemental
  • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

BACKGROUND: One of the difficulties in comparing the numerous studies on manual chest therapy (MCT) is the wide variety of techniques used and terms employed to describe the intervention. This lack of consistency in therapeutic approach and the absence of defined tools for evaluation have led to a continued air of skepticism about its true value. This paper presents a treatment protocol used in a large randomized controlled trial examining the efficacy and cost effectiveness of MCT for patients hospitalized with exacerbations of COPD.

METHODS: Consensus development meetings with key physical therapists were held to identify the essential elements of MCT, address potential areas of ambiguity, and provide a set of clear parameters within which treatment would be based and recorded. This iterative approach resulted in a treatment protocol that combined best clinical practice with the research evidence available to date.

RESULTS: In the Management of Exacerbations of COPD (MATREX) trial, 658 sessions of MCT were delivered by physical therapists over a 3 year period. A high level of adherence to the treatment protocol was seen for all but one of the protocol elements.

CONCLUSIONS: With respect to the essential elements of MCT, the treatment protocol used in the MATREX trial offers sufficient flexibility to the therapist, while being robust enough to maintain clinical trial integrity. The level of adherence by therapists indicates its professional acceptability with respect to delivering and evaluating this therapy.

  • clinical protocols
  • practice guidelines
  • physical therapy modalities
  • adult
  • lung
  • drainage
  • postural
  • COPD.

Introduction

Respiratory care provided by therapists includes manual chest therapy (MCT) techniques designed to improve the mobilization of bronchial secretions,1–8 match ventilation and perfusion rates,9–13 and normalize functional residual capacity.14–21 These outcomes are variously reported to be based on some combination of the effects of gravity, external manipulation of the thorax, turning, postural drainage, percussion, vibration, and spontaneous or assisted cough. The therapy is time consuming and labor intensive, requiring substantial skill and strength on the part of the therapist, and the mental and physical cooperation of the patient. However, indiscriminate use of MCT may disguise real benefit in certain circumstances, and this background fosters an air of skepticism about its true value.

One of the difficulties in comparing the numerous studies on MCT is the lack of homogeneity of the intervention.22 There is also a potential conflict between clinical and research approaches to the evaluation of efficacy. Therapists may feel that standardizing treatment removes the flexibility of approach that is an inherent part of practice. The profession sets great store by being able to respond to a changing clinical situation, and there is concern that strict adherence to a research-led treatment protocol may increase the possibility of over-treatment and unwarranted respiratory distress. In contrast, researchers require precision in the application of the MCT delivered if they are to undertake an objective evaluation of its efficacy.

QUICK LOOK

Current knowledge

Manual chest therapy is provided to a wide variety of patients to mobilize airway secretions, but this therapy is time consuming, labor intensive, and requires substantial skill, strength, and patient cooperation.

What this paper contributes to our knowledge

A standardized manual chest therapy protocol that included positioning, percussion, and vibration may improve adherence by therapists and aid in studying manual chest therapy in selected patient populations. The inconsistent results between previous studies of manual chest therapy may have been due to failure to use a consistent, acceptable manual chest therapy regimen.

Methods

This research was performed at the Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital, Norfolk; James Paget University Hospital, Norfolk; Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Norfolk; and Aintree University Hospital, Liverpool, United Kingdom.

Developing an MCT Treatment Protocol

In 2005, continued ambiguity regarding the value of MCT for particular patient groups led to the commissioning of a large multicenter, randomized controlled trial (MATREX) by the United Kingdom's Department of Health.23 The trial examined the efficacy and cost effectiveness of MCT for patients hospitalized with exacerbations of COPD. The primary outcome measure used to assess efficacy was change in quality of life (St George's Respiratory Questionnaire) at 6 months post-randomization. The protocol was approved by a multicenter research ethics committee (reference 06/Q0101/140). We obtained written informed consent from all patients. This study is registered as ISRCTN 13825248.

One of the trial's first objectives was to establish an MCT treatment protocol that defined the precise nature of the intervention. This was achieved by consensus development meetings with key therapists involved in the study. They identified the essential elements of MCT, using the current research evidence, and identified potential areas of ambiguity; from this the consensus process developed a set of clear parameters within which treatment would be based.

This iterative approach resulted in a treatment protocol (see Appendix 1 in the supplementary materials at http://www.rcjournal.com) that combines best clinical practice with the research evidence available to date.1–21,24–38 Prior to any treatment being given, the therapist was required to assess the patient's suitability for MCT, against a list of contraindications and risk factors (see Appendix 2 in the supplementary materials). With respect to positioning patients during MCT, a photographic list of the 6 most common treatment positions was provided, from which appropriate positions could be selected according to clinical need/precautions. If necessary, the physical therapist could select additional positions, provided these were described accordingly (see Appendix 3 in the supplementary materials). To prevent ambiguity, definitions for the various elements of MCT were provided, along with pictures of ideal hand positions to adopt when performing percussion and vibration techniques (see Appendix 4 in the supplementary materials).

Piloting the MCT Treatment Protocol

In order to assess the adequacy of the MCT treatment protocol, the trial commenced with a pilot phase for the first 6 months of recruitment. Scrutiny of early case report forms revealed the need to define the circumstances under which participants could switch from the control arm to receive MCT. Essentially, these constitute a working definition for respiratory failure39,40 and comprised clinical evidence of sputum retention via auscultation or chest x-ray, arterial blood pH < 7.26, rising arterial blood CO2, and that the subject was already receiving controlled oxygen therapy and/or other supportive treatment(s). If the physical therapist or attending physician became concerned that a subject's condition had deteriorated to the extent that MCT was warranted, all these criteria were required to switch trial arm. In addition, feedback from therapists revealed that while the protocol stipulated that subjects in the intervention arm were encouraged to cough, this was not listed as an explicit instruction in the control arm. Thus, when assessing the effect of MCT, “deliberate” coughing could act as a confounding variable. Therefore, to ensure parity between trial arms, the treatment protocol was amended to include this instruction for control arm subjects.

Results

Numbers Treated and Time Taken

In total, 257 participants in the MATREX study received 658 sessions of MCT over a 3 year period. The number of sessions administered to subjects varied considerably (range 1–25), with the majority receiving 2 or 3 sessions during their hospital admission. The length of time spent performing MCT varied between 1 and 41 min, with an average session length of 12 min. Of sessions lasting < 5 min (n = 14), 4 were at the request of the subject to stop percussion, and 6 concerned subjects who experienced an adverse event that necessitated treatment being truncated. Full details of immediate clinical measures observed during and after use of the treatment protocol are provided in the MATREX study report, alongside the full study outcomes.23

Adverse Events

In total, 15 adverse events were reported (2% of sessions). These comprised increased shortness of breath (n = 5), pain (n = 5), arrhythmia (n = 3), bronchospasm (n = 1), and thoracic hematoma (n = 1). Shortness of breath reported by subjects was accompanied by varying degrees of reduced oxygen saturation (−18% to 0%). Given their nature and frequency, these adverse events were not considered to present any important issues with respect to patient safety and continuation of the trial.

Treatment Positions

In the majority of sessions (61%) physical therapists selected 2 different positions in which to place the subject before performing percussion and vibration techniques. In 44 sessions (6%), therapists selected alternative treatment positions to those suggested by the protocol. These comprised 31 sitting upright, 10 leaning forward, and 3 flat supine. This is an important deviation from the protocol, and it must be acknowledged that subjects presented with unilateral symptoms on assessment. This had not been predicted in the protocol development phase, and with hindsight we would include these positions within the protocol. Movement between the trial's intervention and control arms was minimal (n = 4).

Protocol Adherence

In total, 258 deviations from the MCT treatment protocol were recorded (39%). Of these, 248 (96%) involved the physical therapist selecting a single treatment position, while the protocol stipulated 2. In the majority of cases (n = 156), a clinical rationale for not using a second treatment position was recorded (eg, clinical evidence of unilateral lung problem). On 41 occasions the therapist chose to treat the patient in a sitting position, as opposed to any of the 6 suggested in the protocol. However, for these subjects the therapist did perform percussion and vibration techniques on both sides of the chest. Other protocol violations comprised 6 occasions (< 1%) where oxygen saturation was not recorded and 4 occasions where the subject declined treatment (< 1%).

Conclusions

Findings from the MATREX trial signify good professional acceptance of the treatment protocol. The high level of adherence to all but one of the protocol elements (number of treatment positions selected) indicates that the main aim of defining and standardizing the intended intervention was achieved. Thus, we consider the treatment protocol presented here a useful generic tool for the delivery and evaluation of MCT.

Footnotes

  • Correspondence: Jane Cross EdD, School of Allied Health Professionals, University of East Anglia, Queens Building, Norwich, Norfolk NR4 7TJ United Kingdom. E-mail: j.cross{at}uea.ac.uk.
  • This research was partly supported by the United Kingdom's National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment Programme.

  • The authors have disclosed no conflicts of interest.

  • Supplementary material related to this paper is available at http://www.rcjournal.com.

  • Copyright © 2012 by Daedalus Enterprises Inc.

References

  1. 1.↵
    1. Bateman JR,
    2. Newman SP,
    3. Daunt KM,
    4. Pavia D,
    5. Clarke SW
    . Regional lung clearance of excessive bronchial secretions during chest physiotherapy in patients with stable chronic airways obstruction. Lancet 1979;313(8111):294-297.
    OpenUrl
  2. 2.
    1. Bateman JR,
    2. Newman SP,
    3. Daunt KM,
    4. Sheahan NF,
    5. Pavia D,
    6. Clarke SW
    . Is cough as effective as chest physiotherapy in the removal of excessive tracheo-bronchial secretions? Thorax 1981;36(9):683-687.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  3. 3.
    1. Sutton PP,
    2. Parker RA,
    3. Webber BA,
    4. Newman SP,
    5. Garland N,
    6. Lopez-Vidriero MT,
    7. et al
    . Assessment of the forced expiration technique postural drainage and directed coughing in chest physiotherapy. Eur J Respir Dis 1983;64(1):62-68.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  4. 4.
    1. Shapiro BA
    . Chest physical therapy administered by respiratory therapists. Respir Care 1981;26(7):655-656.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  5. 5.
    1. Hodgkin JE
    . The scientific status of chest physiotherapy. Respir Care 1981;26(7):657-659.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  6. 6.
    1. Wanner A
    . Does chest physical therapy move airway secretions? Am Rev Respir Dis 1984;130(5):701-702.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  7. 7.
    1. Lorin MP,
    2. Denning CR
    . Evaluation of postural drainage by measurement of sputum volume and consistency. Am J Phys Med 1974;50(5):215-219.
    OpenUrl
  8. 8.↵
    1. Murphy MB,
    2. Concannon D,
    3. Fitzgerald MX
    . Chest percussion: help or hindrance to postural drainage? Irish Med J 1983;76(4):189-190.
    OpenUrl
  9. 9.↵
    1. Miller RD,
    2. Fowler WS,
    3. Helmholz F
    . Changes of relative volume and ventilation of the two lungs with change to the lateral decubitus position. J Lab Clin Med 1956;47(2):297-304.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  10. 10.
    1. Zack MB,
    2. Pontoppidan H,
    3. Kazemi H
    . The effect of lateral positions on gas exchange in pulmonary disease. A prospective evaluation. Am Rev Respir Dis 1974;110(1):49-55.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  11. 11.
    1. Piehl MA,
    2. Brown RS
    . Use of extreme position changes in acute respiratory failure. Crit Care Med 1976;4(1):13-14.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  12. 12.
    1. Schimmel L,
    2. Civetta JM,
    3. Kirby RR
    . A new mechanical method to influence pulmonary perfusion in critically ill patients. Crit Care Med 1977;5(6):277-279.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  13. 13.↵
    1. Coonan TJ,
    2. Hope CE
    . Cardio-respiratory effects of change of body position. Can Anaesth Soc J 1983;30(4):424-437.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  14. 14.↵
    1. Mackenzie CF,
    2. Shin B,
    3. Hadi F,
    4. Imle PC
    . Changes in total lung/thorax compliance following chest physiotherapy. Anesth Analg 1980;59(3):207-210.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  15. 15.
    1. Thoren L
    . Post-operative pulmonary complications: observations on their prevention by means of physiotherapy. Acta Chir Scand 1954;107(2-3):193-205.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  16. 16.
    1. Burrington J,
    2. Cotton EK
    . Removal of foreign bodies from the tracheobronchial tree. J Pediatr Surg 1972;7(2):119-122.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  17. 17.
    1. Lord GP,
    2. Hiebert CA,
    3. Francis DT
    . A clinical, radiologic and physiologic evaluation of chest physiotherapy. J Maine Med Assoc 1972;63(1):142-145.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  18. 18.
    1. Newton DAG,
    2. Stephenson A
    . The effect of physiotherapy on pulmonary function: a laboratory study. Lancet 1978;312(8083):228-230.
    OpenUrl
  19. 19.
    1. MacKenzie CF,
    2. Shin B,
    3. McAslan TC
    . Chest physiotherapy: the effect on arterial oxygenation. Anesth Analg 1978;57(1):28-30.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  20. 20.
    1. Marini JJ,
    2. Pierson DJ,
    3. Hudson LD
    . Acute lobar atelectasis: a prospective comparison of fiberoptic bronchoscopy and respiratory therapy. Am Rev Respir Dis 1979;119(1):971-977.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  21. 21.↵
    1. Stiller K,
    2. Geake T,
    3. Taylor J,
    4. Grant R,
    5. Hall B
    . Acute lobar atelectasis: a comparison of two chest physiotherapy regimens. Chest 1990;98(6):1336-1340.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  22. 22.↵
    1. Garrod R,
    2. Lasserson T
    . Role of physiotherapy in the management of chronic lung diseases: an overview of systematic reviews. Respir Med 2007;101(12):2429-2436.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  23. 23.↵
    1. Cross J,
    2. Elender F,
    3. Barton G,
    4. Clark A,
    5. Shepstone L,
    6. Blyth A,
    7. et al
    . A randomised controlled equivalence trial to determine the effectiveness and cost: utility of manual chest physiotherapy techniques in the management of exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (MATREX). Health Technol Assess 2010;14(23):1-147, iii-iv.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  24. 24.↵
    1. Pryor JA,
    2. Webber BA,
    3. Hodson ME,
    4. Batten JC
    . Evaluation of the forced expiration technique as an adjunct to postural drainage in treatment of cystic fibrosis. BMJ 1979;2(6187):417-418.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  25. 25.
    1. Barrell SE,
    2. Abbas HM
    . Monitoring during physiotherapy after open heart surgery. Physiotherapy 1978;64(90):272-273.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  26. 26.
    1. Connors AF,
    2. Hammon WE,
    3. Martin RJ,
    4. Rogers RM
    . Chest physical therapy: the immediate effect on oxygenation in acutely ill patients. Chest 1980;78(4):559-564.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  27. 27.
    1. Hammon WE,
    2. Martin RJ
    . Chest physical therapy for acute atelectasis. Phys Ther 1981;61(2):217-220.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  28. 28.
    AARC Clinical Practice Guideline. Directed cough. Respir Care 1993;38(5):495-499.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  29. 29.
    1. May DB,
    2. Munt PW
    . Physiologic effects of chest percussion and postural drainage in patients with stable chronic bronchitis. Chest 1979;75(1):29-32.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  30. 30.
    1. DeBoeck C,
    2. Zinman R
    . Cough versus chest physiotherapy: a comparison of the acute effects on pulmonary function in patients with cystic fibrosis. Am Rev Respir Dis 1984;129(1):182-184.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  31. 31.
    1. Campbell AH,
    2. O'Connell JM,
    3. Wilson F
    . The effect of chest. physiotherapy upon the FEV1 in chronic bronchitis. Med J Aust 1975;1(2):33-35.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  32. 32.
    1. Feldman J,
    2. Traver GA,
    3. Taussig LM
    . Maximal expiratory flows after postural drainage. Am Rev Respir Dis 1979;119(2):239-245.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  33. 33.
    1. Wollmer P,
    2. Ursing K,
    3. Midgren B,
    4. Eriksson L
    . Inefficiency of chest percussion in the physical therapy of chronic bronchitis. Eur J Respir Dis 1985;66(4):233-239.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  34. 34.
    1. Pavia D,
    2. Thomson ML,
    3. Phillipakos D
    . A preliminary study of the effect of a vibrating pad on bronchial clearance. Am Rev Respir Dis 1976;113(1):92-96.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  35. 35.
    1. Maxwell M,
    2. Redmond A
    . Comparative trial of manual and mechanical percussion technique with gravity-assisted bronchial drainage in patients with cystic fibrosis. Arch Dis Child 1979;54(7):542-544.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  36. 36.
    1. Holody B,
    2. Goldberg HS
    . The effect of mechanical vibration physiotherapy on arterial oxygenation in acutely ill patients with atelectasis or pneumonia. Am Rev Respir Dis 1981;124(4):372-375.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  37. 37.
    1. Radford R,
    2. Barutt J,
    3. Billingsley JG,
    4. Hill W,
    5. Lawson WH,
    6. Willich W
    . A rational basis for percussion augmented mucociliary clearance. Respir Care 1982;27(5):556-563.
    OpenUrl
  38. 38.↵
    1. Pryor JA,
    2. Webber BA,
    3. Hodson ME
    . Effect of chest physiotherapy on oxygen saturation in patients with cystic fibrosis. Thorax 1990;45(1):77.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  39. 39.↵
    1. Plant PK,
    2. Elliott MW
    . Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease 9: management of ventilatory failure in COPD. Thorax 2003;58(6):537-542.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  40. 40.↵
    National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE). Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: national clinical guideline for management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in adults in primary and secondary care. Thorax 2004;59(Suppl 1):1-232.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
View Abstract
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Respiratory Care: 57 (8)
Respiratory Care
Vol. 57, Issue 8
1 Aug 2012
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • Cover (PDF)
  • Index by author
  • Monthly Podcasts
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on American Association for Respiratory Care.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Findings From the MATREX Study: A Treatment Protocol for the Delivery of Manual Chest Therapy in Respiratory Care
(Your Name) has sent you a message from American Association for Respiratory Care
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the American Association for Respiratory Care web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Findings From the MATREX Study: A Treatment Protocol for the Delivery of Manual Chest Therapy in Respiratory Care
Jane Cross, Frances Elender
Respiratory Care Aug 2012, 57 (8) 1263-1266; DOI: 10.4187/respcare.01312

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Share
Findings From the MATREX Study: A Treatment Protocol for the Delivery of Manual Chest Therapy in Respiratory Care
Jane Cross, Frances Elender
Respiratory Care Aug 2012, 57 (8) 1263-1266; DOI: 10.4187/respcare.01312
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Introduction
    • Methods
    • Results
    • Conclusions
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Supplemental
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF

Related Articles

Cited By...

Keywords

  • clinical protocols
  • practice guidelines
  • physical therapy modalities
  • adult
  • lung
  • drainage
  • postural
  • COPD.

Info For

  • Subscribers
  • Institutions
  • Advertisers

About Us

  • About Us
  • Editorial Board
  • Reprints/Permissions

AARC

  • Membership
  • Meetings
  • Clinical Practice Guidelines

More

  • Contact Us
  • RSS
American Association for Respiratory Care

Print ISSN: 0020-1324        Online ISSN: 1943-3654

© Daedalus Enterprises, Inc.

Powered by HighWire