Format

Send to

Choose Destination
J Electromyogr Kinesiol. 2015 Jun;25(3):463-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jelekin.2015.03.006. Epub 2015 Apr 6.

Diaphragmatic amplitude and accessory inspiratory muscle activity in nasal and mouth-breathing adults: a cross-sectional study.

Author information

1
Department of Physical Therapy, Federal University of Santa Maria, Santa Maria, RS, Brazil; Graduate Program of Human Communication Diseases, Federal University of Santa Maria, Santa Maria, RS, Brazil. Electronic address: elaine.trevisan@yahoo.com.br.
2
Graduate Program of Human Communication Diseases, Federal University of Santa Maria, Santa Maria, RS, Brazil.
3
Methodist Faculty of Santa Maria, Santa Maria, RS, Brazil.
4
Department of Medical Clinics, Federal University of Santa Maria, Santa Maria, RS, Brazil.
5
Center of Health Sciences and Sport, Santa Catarina State University, Florianópolis, SC, Brazil.
6
Department of Physical Therapy, Federal University of Santa Maria, Santa Maria, RS, Brazil; Graduate Program of Human Communication Diseases, Federal University of Santa Maria, Santa Maria, RS, Brazil.

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the electromyographic activity of the accessory inspiratory muscles and the diaphragmatic amplitude (DA) in nasal and mouth-breathing adults. The study evaluated 38 mouth-breathing (MB group) and 38 nasal-breathing (NB group) adults, from 18 to 30years old and both sexes. Surface electromyography (sEMG) was used to evaluate the amplitude and symmetry (POC%) of the sternocleidomastoid (SCM) and upper trapezius (UT) muscles at rest, during nasal slow inspiration at Lung Total Capacity (LTC) and, during rapid and abrupt inspiration: Sniff, Peak Nasal Inspiratory Flow (PNIF) and Maximum Inspiratory Pressure (MIP). M-mode ultrasonography assessed the right diaphragm muscle amplitude in three different nasal inspirations: at tidal volume (TV), Sniff and inspiration at LTC. The SCM activity was significantly lower in the MB group during Sniff, PNIF (p<0.01, Mann-Whitney test) and MIP (p<0.01, t-test). The groups did not differ during rest and inspiration at LTC, regarding sEMG amplitude and POC%. DA was significantly lower in the MB group at TV (p<0.01, Mann-Whitney) and TLC (p=0.03, t-test). Mouth breathing reflected on lower recruitment of the accessory inspiratory muscles during fast inspiration and lower diaphragmatic amplitude, compared to nasal breathing.

KEYWORDS:

Diaphragm; Electromyography; Mouth breathing; Nasal obstruction; Respiratory muscles; Ultrasonography

PMID:
25900327
DOI:
10.1016/j.jelekin.2015.03.006
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science
Loading ...
Support Center