Skip to main content
 

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Editor's Commentary
    • Coming Next Month
    • Archives
    • Most-Read Papers of 2021
  • Authors
    • Author Guidelines
    • Submit a Manuscript
  • Reviewers
    • Reviewer Information
    • Create Reviewer Account
    • Reviewer Guidelines: Original Research
    • Reviewer Guidelines: Reviews
    • Appreciation of Reviewers
  • CRCE
    • Through the Journal
    • JournalCasts
    • AARC University
    • PowerPoint Template
  • Open Forum
    • 2022 Call for Abstracts
    • 2021 Abstracts
    • Previous Open Forums
  • Podcast
    • English
    • Español
    • Portugûes
    • 国语
  • Videos
    • Video Abstracts
    • Author Interviews
    • Highlighted Articles
    • The Journal

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
    • Most-Read Papers of 2021
  • Authors
    • Author Guidelines
    • Submit a Manuscript
  • Reviewers
    • Reviewer Information
    • Create Reviewer Account
    • Reviewer Guidelines: Original Research
    • Reviewer Guidelines: Reviews
    • Appreciation of Reviewers
  • CRCE
    • Through the Journal
    • JournalCasts
    • AARC University
    • PowerPoint Template
  • Open Forum
    • 2022 Call for Abstracts
    • 2021 Abstracts
    • Previous Open Forums
  • Podcast
    • English
    • Español
    • Portugûes
    • 国语
  • Videos
    • Video Abstracts
    • Author Interviews
    • Highlighted Articles
    • The Journal
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • YouTube
Research ArticleOriginal Research

Incentive Spirometry Adherence: A National Survey of Provider Perspectives

Adam E M Eltorai, Grayson L Baird, Ashley Szabo Eltorai, Joshua Pangborn, Valentin Antoci, H Allethaire Cullen, Katherine Paquette, Kevin Connors, Jacqueline Barbaria, Kimberly J Smeals, Saurabh Agarwal, Terrance T Healey, Corey E Ventetuolo, Frank W Sellke and Alan H Daniels
Respiratory Care May 2018, 63 (5) 532-537; DOI: https://doi.org/10.4187/respcare.05882
Adam E M Eltorai
Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: [email protected]
Grayson L Baird
Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island.
Rhode Island Hospital, Providence, Rhode Island.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Ashley Szabo Eltorai
Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Joshua Pangborn
Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Valentin Antoci Jr
Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
H Allethaire Cullen
Community College of Rhode Island, Warwick, Rhode Island.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Katherine Paquette
University of Rhode Island, Kingston, Rhode Island.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Kevin Connors
Rhode Island Hospital, Providence, Rhode Island.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jacqueline Barbaria
Rhode Island Hospital, Providence, Rhode Island.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Kimberly J Smeals
Rhode Island Hospital, Providence, Rhode Island.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Saurabh Agarwal
Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Terrance T Healey
Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Corey E Ventetuolo
Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island.
Rhode Island Hospital, Providence, Rhode Island.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Frank W Sellke
Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Alan H Daniels
Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Patient adherence is a critical factor for success of patient-administered therapies, including incentive spirometry (IS). Patient adherence with IS is not known, so we sought to evaluate providers' perspectives on the current state of IS adherence and elucidate possible factors hindering patient adherence.

METHODS: Respiratory therapists (RTs) and nurses across the United States were surveyed via social media and online newsletters. Surveys were distributed to the relevant national RT and nursing societies: the American Association for Respiratory Care, the Academy of Medical-Surgical Nurses, the American Society of Peri-Anesthesia Nurses, and the American Association of Critical-Care Nurses.

RESULTS: Responses from 1,681 (83.8% completion rate) RTs and nurses were received. The clear majority of all providers agreed that patient adherence is poor (86.0%; 1,416 of 1,647 respondents) and should be improved (95.4%; 1,551 of 1,626 respondents). Providers believe that IS adherence is hindered by various factors. The most common reasons cited were that patients forget to use their ISs (83.5%; 1,404 of 1,681 respondents), do not use them effectively (74.4%; 1,251 of 1,681 respondents), and do not use them frequently enough (70.7%; 1,188 of 1,681 respondents).

CONCLUSIONS: These findings from a large national survey of health care providers highlight the need for improved IS adherence and indicate that patient forgetfulness may be a large contributor to nonadherence. Efforts aimed at improving IS adherence are warranted.

  • incentive spirometry
  • nurse
  • respiratory therapy
  • adherence
  • adherence

Introduction

Successful incentive spirometry (IS) implementation is dependent on patient adherence with provider instructions; such instructions include target inspiratory volumes and frequency of use.1 Patients are told to use IS regardless of the provider's presence or absence. Multiple investigations have highlighted patient adherence as a major factor limiting the efficacy of IS.2–4 Poor adherence and suboptimal utilization can preclude the potential benefits of IS.5

Previous studies have demonstrated that IS adherence is not known.5 In a 2016 systematic review of the literature, Narayanan et al5 demonstrated that a major confounder in IS trials is the scarcity of data on patient adherence. The authors found that only 16.6% of IS studies included mention of adherence rates, and even these adherence data were uninterpretable due to omitted data,6,7 averaged population values over the whole intervention period,8 arbitrary classifications of good adherence,8 and poorly kept subject-recorded adherence logs.9 Of the various adherence-monitoring methods that have been tested, direct in-person or electronic observation could be a reliable approach.10 Due to resource limitations, however, these approaches are likely not feasible on a broader scale.

Without a better understanding of the reasons or perceptions of adherence problems, efforts aimed at improving or monitoring adherence may fall short. Accurate adherence data are a prerequisite for valid assessment of IS efficacy and optimization. Previous studies have repeatedly shown that effectiveness of IS has not been demonstrated,2,4,11–14largely due to unknown patient adherence.5 Multiple IS investigations have called for greater attention to adherence data.2,3,6,7,9,15–24 Because the costs of postoperative pulmonary complications are substantial,25–28 optimizing therapeutic strategies, such as IS, is critical.

In an effort to better understand IS adherence, the goal of this study was to evaluate providers' perspectives on the current state of IS adherence in practice and elucidate possible perceived factors hindering patient adherence.

QUICK LOOK

Current knowledge

Patient adherence is a critical factor for success of patient-administered therapies, including incentive spirometry (IS). IS adherence is not known.

What this paper contributes to our knowledge

These findings comprise a large national survey of provider perspectives on IS. The results highlight the need for improved IS adherence and indicate that patient forgetfulness may be a large contributor to nonadherence. Efforts aimed at improving IS adherence are warranted.

Methods

A cross-sectional study of nurses and respiratory therapists (RTs) on the reported application and adherence of IS in clinical practice was completed. For sampling technique, a secure online survey was distributed via email newsletters and social media by way of listserv to members of the American Association of Critical-Care Nurses, the Academy of Medical-Surgical Nurses, the American Association for Respiratory Care, and the American Society of Peri-Anesthesia Nurses, between September and December 2016. These national professional organizations were selected for representing fields that directly implement, manage, and assess IS adherence in daily clinical practice. All members of the professional organizations who receive email newsletters from the organizations were eligible for responding to the survey. Those who responded to the survey were included; members who did not receive the emailed survey and those who did not respond to the survey were excluded. To assess the views of all providers, no minimum years of practice was required for eligibility. This investigation aimed to estimate attitudes of providers, so no specific hypotheses were being tested. Without hypothesized comparisons, anticipated effect sizes do not exist. In turn, sample size from power analysis could not be calculated. The goal, therefore, was to receive responses from as many individuals as possible from each organization. The survey was created using REDCap29 and was approved by an institutional review board. No incentives were provided for completing the survey. Survey responses were anonymous.

Respondents were asked their perspectives on IS adherence and factors hindering IS usage. Given the lack of standardized protocols for IS use and, therefore, the lack of adherence to such protocols, adherence was deliberately left undefined in the survey to assess providers' real-life perspectives in their own practices.30 In so doing, the meaning of adherence is standardized to what is actually practiced by providers. An operational definition of adherence is that of a patient acting in accordance with provider advice. Respondents indicated as many or as few factors that they believed hinder IS usage. The percentage of respondents who marked each factor was calculated.

The reported statistical analyses were conducted using SAS Software 9.4 (SAS, Cary, North Carolina). Counts and percentages were calculated using PROC FREQ, and medians were calculated using PROC MEANS. With Likert-scale responses between 1 and 6, means were estimated using the generalized linear model, assuming a binomial distribution, thus allowing for 95% CIs to be asymmetrical using PROC GLIMMIX.

Results

Responses were received from 1,681 unique nurses and RTs from the 4 national organizations with various educational backgrounds, years of experience, and primary practice locations. Respondent characteristics and survey completion rates are fully detailed in Eltorai et al.30

The clear majority of providers agreed that patient adherence with IS is poor (86.0%; 1,416 of 1,647 respondents) and should be improved (95.4%; 1,551 of 1,626 respondents) (Table 1). Interestingly, the American Association of Critical-Care Nurses and American Association for Respiratory Care respondents showed strongest agreement with poor IS adherence, which may relate to the patient populations under their care. Nurses from the American Association of Critical-Care Nurses also had the strongest agreement with a need to improve IS use adherence (54.8%).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table 1.

Provider Perspectives on IS Adherence

Providers reported that IS adherence is hindered by various factors. The most commonly cited reasons were that patients forget to use their IS device (83.5%; 1,404 of 1,681 respondents), do not use them effectively (74.4%; 1,251 of 1,681 respondents), and do not use them frequently enough (70.7%; 1,188 of 1,681 respondents) (Table 2).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table 2.

Factors Hindering IS Usage

Discussion

A nationwide study of RT and nurse views on IS adherence and potential barriers to IS use was completed. Most RTs and nurses agreed that adherence should be improved and patient forgetfulness is a primary factor hindering IS adherence.

Previous studies have highlighted how little is known about IS adherence5–10 and that there is an urgent need for attention to the topic.2,3,6,7,9,15–24 The findings from this study suggest adherence is not only poor but in need of improvement. Furthermore, by surveying providers who best understand IS, hindrances to adherence are revealed. Understanding such barriers to successful IS adherence offers insight into how best to address such challenges and optimize IS implementation.

Given the high costs of postoperative pulmonary complications for patients, providers, and healthcare expenditures,25–28 optimizing therapeutic strategies such as IS is critical. However, the therapeutic value of IS remains unknown2,4,11–14 and cannot be determined without reliable IS-use data. Only with well-designed clinical trials and reproducible methods of collecting and reporting IS utilization can the efficacy of IS truly be evaluated. Such an investigation may reveal that the issue with IS is that good adherence is not achievable in a realistic, cost-efficient manner. A procedure that patients cannot complete cannot be effective. However, if IS adherence yields improved clinical outcomes, additional investigations will be required to evaluate the cost effectiveness of such interventions and how adherence can be further augmented.

Early IS technology possessed use-recording capabilities for provider review. In 1973, the Bartlett-Edward IS device was developed to incentivize patient usage by providing visual light feedback when patients achieved his or her inspiratory target volume.31 In 1975, Marion Laboratories (Kansas City, Missouri) further enhanced the electronic IS device's visual feedback by putting the display lights on a scale indicating increasingly larger achieved inspiratory volumes.32 The electronic IS devices were in use for many years, but they have been replaced by less expensive single-use devices.2 Current disposable IS devices do not have integrated use-counting capabilities. Previous attempts of recording IS usage via patient reporting, questionnaires, or electronic counters have yielded unreliable results due to inconsistent data collection and inconclusive analyses.5–9

Patient adherence is a major challenge in the implementation of other self-administered therapies as well (eg, medication adherence).33–37 The difficulty in monitoring adherence relates to the variability and fluctuations in individual patient behavior.38–41 Nevertheless, the findings of this investigation further delineate specific factors that likely hinder patient adherence. In particular, the data suggest that patients forgetting to use their IS could be a principle focus for future work on improving adherence. Future research should collect actual patient data for true adherence rates and reasons for non-adherence. Case-study analysis within a specific health network could be useful for this. If the major factor is patients forgetting to use their IS device, reminder systems (eg, emails, automated telephone calls, smartphone reminders) may be of value. A valuable case study would be to collect patient data on adherence before versus after the implementation of such a reminder system. Alternatively, a randomized controlled study comparing patient IS utilization with versus without the reminder system may be helpful.

This study is not without limitations. Sampling was only drawn from nurses and RTs from 4 professional societies, and thus the sample is not all-inclusive. Furthermore, although our completion rates were high, the precise response rate is not known due to the manner in which the survey was distributed. All members of the professional organizations who receive newsletters were eligible. The group includes both those who are currently practicing (any number of years) and those who may no longer be practicing. Such responses reflect both the current state of IS adherence along with the recent past, which helped shape the present. How providers' years of experience and current practice status affect their perspectives on IS warrants further investigation. Survey responses would ideally be collected from all practicing providers to reduce the potential IS bias due to receiving responses only from members of one or more professional societies. Patient adherence with IS in this survey was determined from assessments of nurses and RTs, rather than from measurements of patients. Although the list of factors hindering IS usage is thorough, other unknown hindrances for specific patients may be involved. Additional assessment of IS adherence among specific patient subpopulations (including pediatrics) could provide further granularity and useful patient-specific insights on adherence.

Conclusions

Nearly all providers in this study believe that patient adherence is hindered, at least in part, by patients forgetting to use their IS. Further investigations should include a more detailed assessment of factors influencing patient adherence. Until adherence is well-established, the full potential impact of IS upon patient outcomes cannot be determined.

Acknowledgments

We thank the 4 national societies for their help with distributing the survey. We also thank the following individuals for their contributions to study conception or critical review of the manuscript: Elizabeth Card, Susan Russell RN JD, Barbara Riley DNP RN NEA-BC, Paula Gellner MSN, M Kelly Murphy, Samantha Norris, Renee David, Tina Calise, Katelyn DeCarlo, and Jack A Elias.

Footnotes

  • Correspondence: Adam E M Eltorai MSc, Warren Alpert Medical School, Brown University, 100 Butler Drive, Providence, RI 02906. E-mail: adam_eltorai{at}brown.edu.
  • Mr. Eltorai has disclosed a relationship with Springer and Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Dr. Daniels has disclosed relationships with DePuy, Globus Medical, Orthofix, Springer, and Stryker. The other authors have disclosed no conflicts of interest.

  • Copyright © 2018 by Daedalus Enterprises

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    1. Restrepo RD,
    2. Wettstein R,
    3. Wittnebel L,
    4. Tracy M
    . Incentive spirometry: 2011. Respir Care 2011;56(10):1600–1604.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  2. 2.↵
    1. Overend TJ,
    2. Anderson CM,
    3. Lucy SD,
    4. Bhatia C,
    5. Jonsson BI,
    6. Timmermans C
    . The effect of incentive spirometry on postoperative pulmonary complications. Chest 2001;120(3):971–978.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. 3.↵
    1. Gosselink R,
    2. Schrever K,
    3. Cops P,
    4. Witvrouwen H,
    5. De Lyn P,
    6. Troosters T,
    7. et al
    . Incentive spirometry does not enhance recovery after thoracic surgery. Crit Care Med 2000;28(3):679–683.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. 4.↵
    1. do Nascimento Junior P,
    2. Modolo NS,
    3. Andrade S,
    4. Guimaraes MM,
    5. Braz LG,
    6. El Dib R
    . Incentive spirometry for prevention of postoperative pulmonary complications in upper abdominal surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014(2):CD006058.
  5. 5.↵
    1. Narayanan AL,
    2. Hamid SR,
    3. Supriyanto E
    . Evidence regarding patient adherence with incentive spirometry interventions after cardiac, thoracic and abdominal surgeries: A systematic literature review. Can J Respir Ther 2016;52(1):17–26.
    OpenUrl
  6. 6.↵
    1. Van de Water JM,
    2. Watring WG,
    3. Linton LA,
    4. Murphy M,
    5. Byron RL
    . Prevention of postoperative pulmonary complications. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1972;135(2):229–233.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  7. 7.↵
    1. Craven JL,
    2. Evans GA,
    3. Davenport PJ,
    4. Williams RH
    . The evaluation of the incentive spirometer in the management of postoperative pulmonary complications. Br J Surg 1974;61(10):793–797.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  8. 8.↵
    1. Lyager S,
    2. Wernberg M,
    3. Rajani N,
    4. Boggild-Madsen B,
    5. Nielsen L,
    6. Nielsen HC,
    7. et al
    . Can postoperative pulmonary conditions be improved by treatment with the Bartlett-Edwards incentive spirometer after upper abdominal surgery? Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 1979;23(4):312–319.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  9. 9.↵
    1. Renault JA,
    2. Costa-Val R,
    3. Rosseti MB,
    4. Houri Neto M
    . Comparison between deep breathing exercises and incentive spirometry after CABG surgery. Rev Bras Cir Cardiovasc 2009;24(2):165–172.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  10. 10.↵
    1. LaFleur J,
    2. Oderda GM
    . Methods to measure patient adherence with medication regimens. J Pain Palliat Care Pharmacother 2004;18(3):81–87.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  11. 11.↵
    1. Pasquina P,
    2. Tramer MR,
    3. Walder B
    . Prophylactic respiratory physiotherapy after cardiac surgery: systematic review. BMJ 2003;327(7428):1379.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  12. 12.
    1. Pasquina P,
    2. Tramer MR,
    3. Granier JM,
    4. Walder B
    . Respiratory physiotherapy to prevent pulmonary complications after abdominal surgery: a systematic review. Chest 2006;130(6):1887–1899.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  13. 13.
    1. Carvalho CR,
    2. Paisani DM,
    3. Lunardi AC
    . Incentive spirometry in major surgeries: a systematic review. Rev Bras Fisioter 2011;15(5):343–350.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  14. 14.↵
    1. Freitas ER,
    2. Soares BG,
    3. Cardoso JR,
    4. Atallah AN
    . Incentive spirometry for preventing pulmonary complications after coronary artery bypass graft. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012(9):CD004466.
  15. 15.↵
    1. Thomas JA,
    2. McIntosh JM
    . Are incentive spirometry, intermittent positive pressure breathing, and deep breathing exercises effective in the prevention of postoperative pulmonary complications after upper abdominal surgery? A systematic overview and meta-analysis. Phys Ther 1994;74(1):3–10.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  16. 16.
    1. Renault JA,
    2. Costa-Val R,
    3. Rossetti MB
    . Respiratory physiotherapy in the pulmonary dysfunction after cardiac surgery. Rev Bras Cir Cardiovasc 2008;23(4):562–569.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  17. 17.
    1. Guimaraes MM,
    2. El Dib R,
    3. Smith AF,
    4. Matos D
    . Incentive spirometry for prevention of postoperative pulmonary complications in upper abdominal surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009(3):CD006058.
  18. 18.
    1. Gale GD,
    2. Sanders DE
    . Incentive spirometry: its value after cardiac surgery. Can Anaesth Soc J 1980;27(5):475–480.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  19. 19.
    1. Jung R,
    2. Wight J,
    3. Nusser R,
    4. Rosoff L
    . Comparison of three methods of respiratory care following upper abdominal surgery. Chest 1980;78(1):31–35.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  20. 20.
    1. Lederer DH,
    2. Van de Water JM,
    3. Indech RB
    . Which deep breathing device should the postoperative patient use? Chest 1980;77(5):610–613.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  21. 21.
    1. Oikkonen M,
    2. Karjalainen K,
    3. Kahara V,
    4. Kuosa R,
    5. Schavikin L
    . Comparison of incentive spirometry and intermittent positive pressure breathing after coronary artery bypass graft. Chest 1991;99(1):60–65.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  22. 22.
    1. Crowe JM,
    2. Bradley CA
    . The effectiveness of incentive spirometry with physical therapy for high-risk patients after coronary artery bypass surgery. Phys Ther 1997;77(3):260–268.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  23. 23.
    1. Dias CM,
    2. Vieira Rde O,
    3. Oliveira JF,
    4. Lopes AJ,
    5. Menezes SL,
    6. Guimaraes FS
    . Three physiotherapy protocols: effects on pulmonary volumes after cardiac surgery. J Bras Pneumol 2011;37(1):54–60.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  24. 24.↵
    1. Agostini P,
    2. Naidu B,
    3. Cieslik H,
    4. Steyn R,
    5. Rajesh PB,
    6. Bishay E,
    7. et al
    . Effectiveness of incentive spirometry in patients following thoracotomy and lung resection including those at high risk for developing pulmonary complications. Thorax 2013;68(6):580–585.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  25. 25.↵
    1. McAlister FA,
    2. Bertsch K,
    3. Man J,
    4. Bradley J,
    5. Jacka M
    . Incidence of and risk factors for pulmonary complications after nonthoracic surgery. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2005;171(5):514–517.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  26. 26.
    1. Linde-Zwirble WL,
    2. Bloom JD,
    3. Mecca RS,
    4. Hansell DM
    . Postoperative pulmonary complications in adult elective surgery patients in the US: severity, outcomes and resources use. Crit Care 2010;14(Suppl 1):P210.
    OpenUrl
  27. 27.
    1. Sigl JC,
    2. Bloom JD,
    3. Hansell DM,
    4. Sessler DI
    . Post-operative pulmonary complications and age: mortality, length-of-stay and readmission. Proceedings of the 2010 Annual Meeting of the American Society Anesthesiologists; October 16–20, 2010; San Diego, California.
  28. 28.↵
    1. Khan NA,
    2. Quan H,
    3. Bugar JM,
    4. Lemaire JB,
    5. Brant R,
    6. Ghali WA
    . Association of postoperative complications with hospital costs and length of stay in a tertiary care center. J Gen Intern Med 2006;21(2):177–180.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  29. 29.↵
    1. Harris PA,
    2. Taylor R,
    3. Thielke R,
    4. Payne J,
    5. Gonzalez N,
    6. Conde JG
    . Research electronic data capture (REDCap)–a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform 2009;42(2):377–381.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  30. 30.↵
    1. Eltorai AE,
    2. Baird GL,
    3. Szabo AL,
    4. Pangborn J,
    5. Francoeur K,
    6. Cullen HA,
    7. et al
    . Provider perspectives on incentive spirometry utility and patient protocols. Respir Care 2018;63(5):XXX–XXX.
    OpenUrl
  31. 31.↵
    1. Bartlett RH,
    2. Gazzaniga AB,
    3. Geraghty TR
    . Respiratory maneuvers to prevent postoperative pulmonary complications. A critical review. JAMA 1973;224(7):1017–1021.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  32. 32.↵
    Marion Laboratories, inventor. Electronic incentive breathing exerciser to measure and assist a patient's breathing exercises. US patent 10434171975.
  33. 33.↵
    1. Perri-Moore S,
    2. Kapsandoy S,
    3. Doyon K,
    4. Hill B,
    5. Archer M,
    6. Shane-McWhorter L,
    7. et al
    . Automated alerts and reminders targeting patients: A review of the literature. Patient Educ Couns 2016;99(6):953–959.
    OpenUrl
  34. 34.
    1. Vervloet M,
    2. Linn AJ,
    3. van Weert JC,
    4. de Bakker DH,
    5. Bouvy ML,
    6. van Dijk L
    . The effectiveness of interventions using electronic reminders to improve adherence to chronic medication: a systematic review of the literature. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2012;19(5):696–704.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  35. 35.
    1. Conn VS,
    2. Ruppar TM,
    3. Chan KC,
    4. Dunbar-Jacob J,
    5. Pepper GA,
    6. De Geest S
    . Packaging interventions to increase medication adherence: systematic review and meta-analysis. Curr Med Res Opin 2015;31(1):145–160.
    OpenUrl
  36. 36.
    1. Conn VS,
    2. Ruppar TM,
    3. Enriquez M,
    4. Cooper PS
    . Patient-centered outcomes of medication adherence interventions: systematic review and meta-analysis. Value Health 2016;19(2):277–285.
    OpenUrl
  37. 37.↵
    1. Hutchins DS,
    2. Zeber JE,
    3. Roberts CS,
    4. Williams AF,
    5. Manias E,
    6. Peterson AM,
    7. et al
    . Initial medication adherence-review and recommendations for good practices in outcomes research: an ISPOR medication adherence and persistence special interest group report. Value Health 2015;18(5):690–699.
    OpenUrl
  38. 38.↵
    1. Vermeire E,
    2. Hearnshaw H,
    3. Van Royen P,
    4. Denekens J
    . Patient adherence to treatment: three decades of research. A comprehensive review. J Clin Pharm Ther 2001;26(5):331–42.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  39. 39.
    1. Wu CL,
    2. Raja SN
    . Treatment of acute postoperative pain. Lancet 2011;377(9784):2215–2225.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  40. 40.
    1. Caza N,
    2. Taha R,
    3. Qi Y,
    4. Blaise G
    . The effects of surgery and anesthesia on memory and cognition. Prog Brain Res 2008;169:409–422.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  41. 41.↵
    1. Tung HH,
    2. Jan MS,
    3. Huang CM,
    4. Shih CC,
    5. Chang CY,
    6. Liau CY
    . Using the theory of planned behavior to predict the use of incentive spirometry among cardiac surgery patients in Taiwan. Heart Lung 2011;40(5):440–447.
    OpenUrlPubMed
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Respiratory Care: 63 (5)
Respiratory Care
Vol. 63, Issue 5
1 May 2018
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • Cover (PDF)
  • Index by author

 

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.
Incentive Spirometry Adherence: A National Survey of Provider Perspectives
(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
Incentive Spirometry Adherence: A National Survey of Provider Perspectives
Adam E M Eltorai, Grayson L Baird, Ashley Szabo Eltorai, Joshua Pangborn, Valentin Antoci, H Allethaire Cullen, Katherine Paquette, Kevin Connors, Jacqueline Barbaria, Kimberly J Smeals, Saurabh Agarwal, Terrance T Healey, Corey E Ventetuolo, Frank W Sellke, Alan H Daniels
Respiratory Care May 2018, 63 (5) 532-537; DOI: 10.4187/respcare.05882

Citation Manager Formats

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

Share
Incentive Spirometry Adherence: A National Survey of Provider Perspectives
Adam E M Eltorai, Grayson L Baird, Ashley Szabo Eltorai, Joshua Pangborn, Valentin Antoci, H Allethaire Cullen, Katherine Paquette, Kevin Connors, Jacqueline Barbaria, Kimberly J Smeals, Saurabh Agarwal, Terrance T Healey, Corey E Ventetuolo, Frank W Sellke, Alan H Daniels
Respiratory Care May 2018, 63 (5) 532-537; DOI: 10.4187/respcare.05882
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
    • Discussion
    • Conclusions
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF

Related Articles

Cited By...

Keywords

  • incentive spirometry
  • nurse
  • respiratory therapy
  • adherence

Info For

  • Subscribers
  • Institutions
  • Advertisers

About Us

  • About the Journal
  • 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