| Abstract |
This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of nonpharmacological respiratory interventions in
patients with pulmonary diseases. Specifically, it quantitatively assessed the impact of these interventions on pulmonary
function (forced expiratory volume in 1 s [FEV₁], forced vital capacity [FVC], maximal inspiratory pressure [MIP], and
maximal expiratory pressure [MEP]) and exercise capacity (6-min walk test [6MWT]) based on randomized controlled
trials (RCTs). Methods: A total of 129 RCTs published over the past 10 years were initially identified from PubMed,
Embase, and Cochrane Library. After applying the eligibility criteria, four studies were included in the final analysis. The
effect sizes were calculated using the standardized mean difference (SMD), and a random effects model was applied
considering inter-study heterogeneity. Subgroup analyses were performed by disease type, intervention method, and
functional outcomes. Results: Significant improvements were found across all outcomes (FEV₁: SMD=0.28; FVC:
SMD=0.25; MIP: SMD=0.31; MEP: SMD=0.29; 6MWT: SMD=0.34; all p<.001). Inspiratory muscle training (IMT) showed the
greatest effect size (SMD=0.36), and the most consistent improvement was observed in patients with chronic obstructive
pulmonary disease (SMD=0.34). The results of funnel plot visualization and Egger’s test (p=.557) indicated a low risk of
publication bias. Conclusion: Nonpharmacological respiratory interventions are effective in improving pulmonary
function and exercise capacity in patients with pulmonary diseases. IMT, pulmonary rehabilitation, and combined training
modalities demonstrated high clinical utility. Future research should focus on standardized intervention protocols,
long-term follow-up, and tailored approaches for high-risk populations. |