HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (3) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Barry, P.W. Articles by Richalet, J-P. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Barry, P.W. Articles by Richalet, J-P.

Nasal peak inspiratory flow at altitude

¹ Dept of Child Health, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK, ² Université Libre de Bruxelles, Laboratoire de Physiologie et de Physiopathologie, Faculté de Médecine – Campus Erasme, Bruxelles, Belgium, ³ Association pour la Recherche en Physiologie de l'Environnement, Laboratoire de Physiologie, UFR de Médecine, France

CORRESPONDENCE: P.W. Barry, Dept of Child Health, University of Leicester, Clinical Sciences Building, Leicester Royal Infirmary, PO Box 65, Leicester, LE2 7LX, UK. Fax: 0116 2523282

Keywords: Altitude, nasal obstruction, spirometry

Received: November 11, 2000
Accepted July 25, 2001

This study was supported by grants from the Région Provence-Alpes-Côte d'Azur and the Ministère de la Jeunesse et des Sports (France).

The present study investigated whether there are changes in nasal peak inspiratory flow (NPIF) during hypobaric hypoxia under controlled environmental conditions.

During operation Everest III (COMEX '97), eight subjects ascended to a simulated altitude of 8,848 m in a hypobaric chamber. NPIF was recorded at simulated altitudes of 0 m, 5,000 m and 8,000 m. Oral peak inspiratory and expiratory flow (OPIF, OPEF) were also measured. Ambient air temperature and humidity were controlled.

NPIF increased by a mean±sd of 16±12% from sea level to 8,000 m, whereas OPIF increased by 47±14%. NPIF rose by 0.085±0.03 L·s^–1 per kilometre of ascent (p<0.05), significantly less than the rise in OPIF and OPEF of 0.35±0.10 and 0.33±0.04 L·s^–1 per kilometre (p<0.0005).

Nasal peak inspiratory flow rises with ascent to altitude. The rise in nasal peak inspiratory flow with altitude was far less than oral peak inspiratory flow and less than the predicted rise according to changes in air density. This suggests flow limitation at the nose, and occurs under controlled environmental conditions, refuting the hypothesis that nasal blockage at altitude is due to the inhalation of cold, dry air. Further work is needed to determine if nasal blockage limits activity at altitude.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J.G. Widdicombe Nasal airflow resistance at simulated altitude Eur. Respir. J., January 1, 2001; 19(1): 4 - 5. [Full Text] [PDF]