A Secondary Analysis of Gender Respiratory Features for Ultrasonography Bilateral Diaphragm Thickness, Respiratory Pressures, and Pulmonary Function in Low Back Pain
Nerea Molina-Hernández,
David Rodríguez-Sanz,
José López Chicharro,
Ricardo Becerro-de-Bengoa-Vallejo,
Marta Elena Losa-Iglesias,
Davinia Vicente-Campos,
Daniel Marugán-Rubio,
Samuel Eloy Gutiérrez-Torre,
César Calvo-Lobo
Affiliations
Nerea Molina-Hernández
Faculty of Nursing, Physiotherapy and Podiatry, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, 28040 Madrid, Spain
David Rodríguez-Sanz
Faculty of Nursing, Physiotherapy and Podiatry, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, 28040 Madrid, Spain
José López Chicharro
Grupo FEBIO, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, 28040 Madrid, Spain
Ricardo Becerro-de-Bengoa-Vallejo
Faculty of Nursing, Physiotherapy and Podiatry, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, 28040 Madrid, Spain
Marta Elena Losa-Iglesias
Faculty of Health Sciences, Universidad Rey Juan Carlos, 28922 Madrid, Spain
Davinia Vicente-Campos
Faculty of Health Sciences, Universidad Francisco de Vitoria, Pozuelo de Alarcón, 28223 Madrid, Spain
Daniel Marugán-Rubio
Faculty of Nursing, Physiotherapy and Podiatry, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, 28040 Madrid, Spain
Samuel Eloy Gutiérrez-Torre
Faculty of Nursing, Physiotherapy and Podiatry, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, 28040 Madrid, Spain
César Calvo-Lobo
Faculty of Nursing, Physiotherapy and Podiatry, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, 28040 Madrid, Spain
The aim of the present study was to determine the gender respiratory differences of bilateral diaphragm thickness, respiratory pressures, and pulmonary function in patients with low back pain (LBP). A sample of 90 participants with nonspecific LBP was recruited and matched paired by sex (45 women and 45 men). Respiratory outcomes included bilateral diaphragm thickness by ultrasonography, respiratory muscle strength by maximum inspiratory (MIP) and expiratory (MEP) pressures, and pulmonary function by forced expiratory volume during 1 s (FEV1), forced vital capacity (FVC) and FEV1/FVC spirometry parameters. The comparison of respiratory outcomes presented significant differences (p d = 1.26–1.58) showing means differences (95% CI) for MIP of −32.26 (−42.99, −21.53) cm H2O, MEP of −50.66 (−64.08, −37.25) cm H2O, FEV1 of −0.92 (−1.18, −0.65) L, and FVC of −1.00 (−1.32, −0.69) L, with lower values for females versus males. Gender-based respiratory differences were presented for maximum respiratory pressures and pulmonary function in patients with nonspecific LBP. Women presented greater inspiratory and expiratory muscle weakness as well as worse lung function, although these differences were not linked to diaphragm thickness during normal breathing.