Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38860716›Full record

Trial reportJournal of rehabilitation medicine2024

Diaphragmatic strengthening exercises for patients with post COVID-19 condition after mild-to-moderate acute COVID-19 infection: a randomized controlled study.

Tamer I Abo Elyazed, Ahmed Abd El-Moneim Abd El-Hakim, Ola I Saleh, Marwa Mostafa Fadel Sonbol, Hoda Assad Eid, Eman Moazen, Mohammad Hamad Alhassoon, Seham Ezzat Fathy Elfeky

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of rehabilitation medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Incentive Spirometer in COVID-19: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Systematic Review of Randomized Clinical Trials for the Treatment of Long COVID Syndrome.Journal of community hospital internal medicine perspectives · 2026
    Article
  9. Assessment and management of post-COVID-19 pulmonary complications: a rapid review.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2026
    Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Tamer I Abo ElyazedPhysical Therapy For Internal Medicine Department, Faculty of Physical Therapy, Beni-Suef University, Ben-Suef, Egypt.
Ahmed Abd El-Moneim Abd El-HakimBasic Sciences Department, Faculty of Physical Therapy, Beni-Suef University, Ben-Suef, Egypt.
Ola I SalehDiagnostic Radiology Department, Al-Azhar University, Cairo, Egypt.
Marwa Mostafa Fadel SonbolDiagnostic Radiology Department, Al-Azhar University, Cairo, Egypt.
Hoda Assad EidChest Diseases Department, Al-Azhar University, Cairo, Egypt.
Eman MoazenChest Diseases Department, Al-Azhar University, Cairo, Egypt. emanmoazen@gmail.com.
Mohammad Hamad AlhassoonInternal Medicine Department, King Fahd Specialist Hospital, Burydah, Saudi Arabia.
Seham Ezzat Fathy ElfekyChest Diseases Department, Tanta University, Tanta, Egypt.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo assess the clinical effects of incentive spirometry (IS) and diaphragmatic breathing (DB) in patients with post COVID-19 condition and diaphragmatic dysfunction as compared with the standard care alone.

methodsThe present longitudinal randomized study included 60 patients with post COVID-19 condition and diaphragmatic dysfunction. Patients were equally randomized to receive standard care plus IS (G1), standard care plus DB (G2) or standard care alone (G3) for 8 weeks. The primary outcome is clinical improvement as evaluated by the modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) dyspnoea scale.

resultsComparison between the studied groups revealed significant improvement in G1 and G2 in all parameters at the end of follow-up. However, no significant improvement was found in G3. At the end of follow-up, 15 patients (75.0%) in G1, 11 patients (55.0%) in G2, and 3 patients (15.0%) in G3 showed improvement on the mMRC dyspnoea scale. Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified mild acute COVID-19 infection (p = 0.009), use of IS (p < 0.001), and use of DB (p = 0.023) as significant predictors of improvement on the mMRC dyspnoea scale.

conclusionsIS or DB training in addition to the standard care in post COVID-19 condition was associated with better clinical improvement as compared with the standard care alone.

Indexed as

Breathing ExercisesCOVID-19DiaphragmDyspneaAdultAgedFemaleHumansLongitudinal StudiesMaleMiddle AgedPost-Acute COVID-19 SyndromeSARS-CoV-2SpirometryTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID38860716
PMCPMC11182030

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.