2 in 1 Incentive Spirometer and Positive Expiratory Pressure Device

by Sohum Trivedi & Zain Arfoosh

A few words from the participant(s)

What steps did you take to develop your project?

First, we researched Cystic Fibrosis. We found out that these two devices, an incentive spirometer, and a positive expiratory pressure device, are often used in conjunction with each other, and patients are supposed to perform ten sets of inhalations with the IS device and ten sets of forced exhalations through a PEP flutter device. We then thought that combining them would further help the patients by increasing compliance as they now only have to use one device. This would also reduce the patients’ cost as they would only have to buy only one device. We created a cardboard model to help us visualize what the new device would look like. We then created BETA 1 using CAD and printed it. After testing BETA 1, we saw that we had several issues. The volume of the incentive spirometer chamber was not large enough, and the positive expiratory pressure component was non-functional. We took what we learned from BETA 1 and applied it to create a new device iteration, BETA 2.

We increased the size of the IS chamber and used a high-quality 3D printing service. To test our devices, we needed to be able to simulate breathing using the resources available to us. We simulated inspiration using a handheld vacuum to test the incentive spirometer component. The vacuum was attached to the incentive spirometer through a breathing tube. The vacuum was turned on for various time durations ranging from 0.5s to 4s in 0.5s. Then volume readings on the currently existing device and the new device were then recorded. To test the PEP component, exhalation was simulated using a bike pump. Volumes of air ranging from 500 mL to 4000 mL were pumped into the device. The number of clicks per second produced by the PEP devices was then measured to calculate the frequency of the oscillations generated. By conducting trials for the functionality, we were able to show that our new combined device was statistically non-inferior to the performance of the two separate devices.

Why are you competing?

Our project is one of a kind. By conducting trials for the functionality, we were able to show that our new combined device was statistically non-inferior to the performance of the two separate devices.

  Cystic fibrosis affects1 in 2500 white newborns, many people, often lowering their lifespans. Because the disease is heritable, many of the patients who have this disease are children. Children are often non-compliant with regimented medical instructions requiring the use of two different devices with ten sets of repetition for each device. Combining these two devices will be beneficial to the patients as it is often difficult for young patients to constantly keep track of and use two separate devices, as one device goes missing or breaks. Combining the two devices will help the patients increase compliance as the patient now only has to use one device. This would additionally reduce the cost to the patients as they would only have to buy one device. Also, our device is modular, so if one component, say the PEP flutter device or the IS, breaks, the patient only has to procure that component. Being 3D printed, the device would be inexpensive. Being made of plastic, the device would be resistant to breaking. It can be easily washed and cleaned. We have further plans to try and make the device transparent, making it easier for the patients to be able to measure and track their inspiratory volumes more efficiently. Having brightly colored motifs on the device could help them be more customizable and attractive for the patients increasing compliance