Mehdi Ahmadi; Mohsen Amiri; Tahere Rezaeian; Amir Mansour Rezadoost; Enayatollah Bakhshi; Iraj Abdollahi
Volume 22, Issue 7 , 2020
Abstract
Background: Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is one of the most common gastrointestinal disorders that can disturb pa- tients respiratory indices. Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) such as omeprazole are currently the most common treatment in the patients. PPI-refractory GERD is a clinical problem ...
Read More
Background: Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is one of the most common gastrointestinal disorders that can disturb pa- tients respiratory indices. Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) such as omeprazole are currently the most common treatment in the patients. PPI-refractory GERD is a clinical problem constituting around 30% of patients with GERD.
Objectives: The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of diaphragmatic breathing (DB) and omeprazole on respiratory indices (RI) and diaphragmatic excursion (DEX) in patients with GERD.
Methods: This is a clinical trial conducted for eight weeks among 40 patients with severe GERD in Tehran in 2018. The block ran- domization method was designed to randomize 40 patients into two groups (DB and control) that resulted in equal sample sizes. The control group received omeprazole 20 mg once daily, and the DB group, in addition to omeprazole, performed DB. Respiratory indices, including (Forced Vital Capacity (FVC), Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 second (FEV1), Peak Expiratory Flow (PEF)), and DEX were evaluated before, immediately, and six weeks after the end of intervention by spirometry and ultrasonography; respectively. Results: There was no significant difference in the RI and DEX before the intervention between groups. FVC (P = 0.04) and PEF (P = 0.02) significantly changed in the control group, but FEV1 (P = 0.001), FVC (P = 0.002), PEF (P = 0.001) and DEX (0.001) significantly changed after DB. There was a significant difference in terms of RI between before and followed up in DB.
Conclusions: Diaphragmatic breathing with omeprazole had more effects on RI and DEX than omeprazole alone. The positive effects of DB remain at least six weeks after the end of the intervention
Ailin Talimkhani; Iraj Abdollahi; Maryam Zoghi; Elaheh Talebi Ghane; Shapour Jaberzadeh
Volume 20, Issue 7 , 2018, Pages 1-7
Abstract
Background: Unihemispheric concurrent dual-site anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (a-tDCSUHCDS) of the primary mo- tor cortex (M1) and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) are introduced as effective techniques on M1 corticospinal excitability enhancement and its after-effects. Objectives: ...
Read More
Background: Unihemispheric concurrent dual-site anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (a-tDCSUHCDS) of the primary mo- tor cortex (M1) and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) are introduced as effective techniques on M1 corticospinal excitability enhancement and its after-effects. Objectives: The current study aimed at investigating the potential effects of multiple sessions of a-tDCSUHCDS of M1-DLPFC on motor skills learning in healthy individuals.Methods: The randomized, clinical trial was conducted on a total of 37 volunteers completed all sessions of the study and were randomly divided into two groups of a-tDCSUHCDS and sham stimulation by the block randomization method. The current study was performed from January to May 2017 in Iran. Participants attended daily 20-minute motor training sessions for three consecu- tive days, while they concurrently received a-tDCS. Motor skills were assessed before the intervention (day 1), immediately after the intervention (day 3), and one week after the completion of the intervention.Results: A total of 37 participants were included in the data analysis. Immediately after the completion of the intervention on day 3, mean skills in the experimental and control groups were 0.33 and 0.30, respectively. One week after the completion of the interven- tion, mean skills in the experimental and control groups were 0.36 and 0.29, respectively. The trend of motor learning considerably increased in the experimental (0.17; P < 0.001) and control (0.11; P < 0.001) groups. No significant difference was observed in mo- tor learning immediately after the intervention between the groups (P = 0.23), while there was a significant difference in long-term offline learning between the groups (P = 0.04).Conclusions: Greater motor skills in the a-tDCSUHCDS group compared with the sham tDCS group at one-week retention indicated the robustness of the a-tDCSUHCDS effect.
