Back to Search Start Over

Oxygen for breathlessness in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease who do not qualify for home oxygen therapy.

Authors :
Ekström, Magnus
Ahmadi, Zainab
Bornefalk-Hermansson, Anna
Abernethy, Amy
Currow, David
Ekström, Magnus
Ahmadi, Zainab
Bornefalk-Hermansson, Anna
Abernethy, Amy
Currow, David
Publication Year :
2016

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Breathlessness is a cardinal symptom of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Long-term oxygen therapy (LTOT) is given to improve survival time in people with COPD and severe chronic hypoxaemia at rest. The efficacy of oxygen therapy for breathlessness and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in people with COPD and mild or no hypoxaemia who do not meet the criteria for LTOT has not been established. OBJECTIVES: To determine the efficacy of oxygen versus air in mildly hypoxaemic or non-hypoxaemic patients with COPD in terms of (1) breathlessness; (2) HRQOL; (3) patient preference whether to continue therapy; and (4) oxygen-related adverse events. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE and Embase, to 12 July 2016, for randomised controlled trials (RCTs). We handsearched the reference lists of included articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included RCTs of the effects of non-invasive oxygen versus air on breathlessness, HRQOL or patient preference to continue therapy among people with COPD and mild or no hypoxaemia (partial pressure of oxygen (PaO2) > 7.3 kPa) who were not already receiving LTOT. Two review authors independently assessed articles for inclusion in the review. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently collected and analysed data. We assessed risk of bias by using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias tool'. We pooled effects recorded on different scales as standardised mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using random-effects models. Lower SMDs indicated decreased breathlessness and reduced HRQOL. We performed subanalyses and sensitivity analyses and assessed the quality of evidence according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach. MAIN RESULTS: Compared with the previous review, which was published in 2011, we included 14 additional studies (493 particip

Details

Database :
OAIster
Notes :
English
Publication Type :
Electronic Resource
Accession number :
edsoai.on1235204881
Document Type :
Electronic Resource
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1002.14651858.CD006429.pub3