Differences between the groups were not statistically significant. The weaning period was a mean of 8 hours shorter (95% CI –16 to 32) in the experimental group. The changes in respiratory muscle strength and in ventilation measures are presented in Table 2, with individual participant data presented in Table 4 (on the eAddenda). Maximal inspiratory pressure increased in the experimental group by a mean of 7 cmH2O (SD 12) while in the control group it reduced by a mean of 3 cmH2O (SD 11). This was a statistically significant difference in change between the groups of 10 cmH2O (95% CI 5 to 15). Similarly, maximal expiratory

pressure improved in the experimental group while in the control group it reduced slightly, with a significant mean between-group difference in change of 8 cmH2O (95% CI 2 to 13). Tidal volume also increased in the intervention

group and decreased in the control group, with a significant learn more mean difference of 73 mL (95% CI 17 to 128). Although the rapid shallow breathing index reduced (ie, improved) more in the experimental group than the control group, the difference was not statistically significant. The monitoring of cardiorespiratory variables did not identify any adverse events. Non-invasive mechanical ventilation was used post-weaning in five patients in the experimental group and in 10 patients in the control group. Extubation failure (ie, reintubation within 48 hours of weaning) was observed in three patients in each group. much Our findings Selleck SRT1720 showed

that inspiratory muscle training during the weaning period improved maximal inspiratory and expiratory pressures and tidal volume, although it did not reduce the weaning period significantly. These findings were largely consistent with the findings of previous randomised trials of inspiratory muscle training to accelerate weaning from mechanical ventilation in intubated patients, despite some differences in methods. Caruso et al (2005) effected training by adjusting the pressure trigger sensitivity of the ventilator to 20% of maximal inspiratory pressure, increased for 5 minutes at every session until it reached 30 minutes. Thereafter, the load was increased by 10% of the initial maximal inspiratory pressure to a maximum of 40% of the maximal inspiratory pressure (Caruso et al 2005). Cader et al (2010) and Cader et al (2012) used a threshold device with an initial load of 30% of maximal inspiratory pressure, increased by 10% daily for 5 minutes. Martin et al (2011) used a threshold device set at the highest pressure tolerated, which was between 7 and 12 cmH2O. In our study the maximal inspiratory pressure was evaluated before each session and the training load was fixed at 40% of this value, which equated to a mean of 13 cmH2O initially. Therefore the initial load was higher in our study than in other studies in this area.