Biologic Specimen and Data Repository Information Coordinating Center
Home > Studies > IPPB

Resources Available

Study Datasets Only

Study Documents

PDF Data Dictionary (PDF - 32.0 KB)
PDF Code Manual (PDF - 11.0 KB)

Persons using assistive technology may not be able to fully access information in the study documents. For assistance, Contact BioLINCC and include the web address and/or publication title in your message.

If you need help accessing information in different file formats such as PDF, XLS, DOC, see Instructions for Downloading Viewers and Players.

Clinical Study of Intermittent Positive Pressure Breathing (IPPB)

Clinical Trials URL:
Study Type: Clinical Trial
Prepared on October 13, 2008
Last Updated on June 23, 2005
Study Dates: 1976-1983
Consent: Unrestricted Consent
Commercial Use Restrictions: No
NHLBI Division: DCVS
Collection Type: Open BioLINCC Study - See bottom of this webpage for request information


To evaluate the efficacy of long-term intermittent positive pressure breathing (IPPB) treatment when used as an adjunct to the overall care of ambulatory outpatients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The evaluation compared the use of IPPB with use of a powered nebulizer.


Multicenter randomized controlled clinical trial. Criteria for inclusion: Men and women, ages 30 to 74, who were ambulatory and had symptomatic chronic bronchitis or emphysema.


Compliance with treatment, lung function, and quality of life were evaluated at regular intervals during follow-up, and records were kept of hospitalizations and vital status. Treatment compliance was less than optimal; only half of the patients used their devices for the prescribed amount of time or 10 minutes at least three times a day. Although this was disappointing, it was probably the best compliance that could be attained. There was no statistically significant difference between the treatment groups in mortality, rate and duration of hospitalizations, or change in lung function or life quality with time, overall or for clinically relevant subgroups. The trial group saw no advantage of IPPB over compressor nebulizer therapy and concluded that, if an advantage existed, it must be marginal.