Skip to main content
placeholder image

Phonic respiration and Its impact on carbon dioxide re‐breathing in respiratory protective devices

Conference Paper


Download full-text (Open Access)

Abstract


  • Background: Carbon dioxide (CO2) re‐breathing has been recognised as a key concern regarding

    respirator use and is related to increased respiration, heart rate, breathing discomfort, anxiety,

    headache, impaired cognitive function, and in higher amounts asphyxia or death. Several studies

    have examined CO2 levels in respiratory protective devices (RPDs), however no previous

    investigations have evaluated the relationship between CO2 inhalation and phonic respiration

    (breathing during speech).

    Methods and Approach: A total of 22 participants (8 females) volunteered for the pilot study.

    Participants performed a graded exercise test on a cycle ergometer that increased in resistance

    every 5 minutes. During the third minute of each stage participants read aloud a prepared text.

    Measures of expired (PECO2) and inspired CO2 (PICO2), heart rate (HR), peak inspiratory air flow

    (PIAF) and dyspnoea (breathing discomfort) were monitored.

    Results and Discussion: A paired sample t‐test was performed to compare PICO2 within the two

    breathing conditions (normal and phonic respiration). The variables were calculated across all six

    workloads (rest, 75W, 100W, 125W, 150W and 175W) (alpha was set at 0.05). Significant

    differences between the two breathing conditions, at rest and each exercise workload were found

    (see Table 1). During normal respiration, PICO2 was generally below 2%, however was present at

    higher levels during phonic respiration. The highest PICO2 was obtained at rest, and was observed

    to decrease during increased oxygen uptake (workload) suggesting that the breathing frequency

    and flow rates are a decisive factor in CO2 re‐breathing in RPDs.

    Preliminary Conclusions: The results showed that phonic respiration in respirators contributed to

    significantly higher levels of CO2 re‐breathing that was often beyond the design standards

    recommended by Standards Australia (1%). Further research into the occurrence of CO2 rebreathing in RPDs and its impact on workers who inevitably wear them for prolonged periods is in

    progress.

Publication Date


  • 2012

Citation


  • Smith, C., Whitelaw, J. L. & Davies, B. (2012). Phonic respiration and Its impact on carbon dioxide re‐breathing in respiratory protective devices. Sixteenth Biennial Conference: “A Global View on Respiratory Protection” (p. 63). Boston: International Society for Respiratory Protection.

Ro Full-text Url


  • http://ro.uow.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4195&context=hbspapers

Ro Metadata Url


  • http://ro.uow.edu.au/hbspapers/3143

Start Page


  • 63

Place Of Publication


  • Boston

Abstract


  • Background: Carbon dioxide (CO2) re‐breathing has been recognised as a key concern regarding

    respirator use and is related to increased respiration, heart rate, breathing discomfort, anxiety,

    headache, impaired cognitive function, and in higher amounts asphyxia or death. Several studies

    have examined CO2 levels in respiratory protective devices (RPDs), however no previous

    investigations have evaluated the relationship between CO2 inhalation and phonic respiration

    (breathing during speech).

    Methods and Approach: A total of 22 participants (8 females) volunteered for the pilot study.

    Participants performed a graded exercise test on a cycle ergometer that increased in resistance

    every 5 minutes. During the third minute of each stage participants read aloud a prepared text.

    Measures of expired (PECO2) and inspired CO2 (PICO2), heart rate (HR), peak inspiratory air flow

    (PIAF) and dyspnoea (breathing discomfort) were monitored.

    Results and Discussion: A paired sample t‐test was performed to compare PICO2 within the two

    breathing conditions (normal and phonic respiration). The variables were calculated across all six

    workloads (rest, 75W, 100W, 125W, 150W and 175W) (alpha was set at 0.05). Significant

    differences between the two breathing conditions, at rest and each exercise workload were found

    (see Table 1). During normal respiration, PICO2 was generally below 2%, however was present at

    higher levels during phonic respiration. The highest PICO2 was obtained at rest, and was observed

    to decrease during increased oxygen uptake (workload) suggesting that the breathing frequency

    and flow rates are a decisive factor in CO2 re‐breathing in RPDs.

    Preliminary Conclusions: The results showed that phonic respiration in respirators contributed to

    significantly higher levels of CO2 re‐breathing that was often beyond the design standards

    recommended by Standards Australia (1%). Further research into the occurrence of CO2 rebreathing in RPDs and its impact on workers who inevitably wear them for prolonged periods is in

    progress.

Publication Date


  • 2012

Citation


  • Smith, C., Whitelaw, J. L. & Davies, B. (2012). Phonic respiration and Its impact on carbon dioxide re‐breathing in respiratory protective devices. Sixteenth Biennial Conference: “A Global View on Respiratory Protection” (p. 63). Boston: International Society for Respiratory Protection.

Ro Full-text Url


  • http://ro.uow.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4195&context=hbspapers

Ro Metadata Url


  • http://ro.uow.edu.au/hbspapers/3143

Start Page


  • 63

Place Of Publication


  • Boston