Evaluation of domiciliary long-term oxygen therapy with oxygen concentrators.

Israel journal of medical sciences Pub Date : 1997-01-01
R J Shiner, U Zaretsky, M Mirali, S Benzaray, D Elad
{"title":"Evaluation of domiciliary long-term oxygen therapy with oxygen concentrators.","authors":"R J Shiner,&nbsp;U Zaretsky,&nbsp;M Mirali,&nbsp;S Benzaray,&nbsp;D Elad","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Domiciliary long-term oxygen therapy (LTOT) is usually supplied by means of oxygen concentrators (OCs). Various factors that determine the efficacy of such a treatment were evaluated. Sixty-three patients, arbitrarily selected from lists of health care providers, were visited at home by a biomedical engineer and a pulmonary function technician. The evaluation consisted of: i) responses to a directed questionnaire, ii) assessment of the OC output characteristics, and iii) measurement of the patient's oxygen saturation (SaO2) at rest with and without oxygen supplement. Only 33% of patients received oxygen treatment for the recommended 12-24 hours/day and 5% of patients waited the recommended 10 minutes of OC warm-up before connection. Filters were cleaned weekly by only 30% of patients and the concentrator was serviced 3-4 times a year in 25% of cases. The OC was thought to be unduly noisy by 24% of patients and connecting tubing of less than 6 meters was fitted to 90% of OCs, thereby limiting patient mobility. Most of the OCs did not yield the recommended oxygen concentration and the flow rate meters on them tended to underread. Therefore, only 22% of patients received the prescribed oxygen supplement. Whilst breathing room air, a substantial proportion of patients had an SaO2 >90%. Improvements are clearly required in terms of medical indications for LTOT, patient education and supervision, supply and maintenance of concentrators and related equipment.</p>","PeriodicalId":14590,"journal":{"name":"Israel journal of medical sciences","volume":"33 1","pages":"23-9"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1997-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Israel journal of medical sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Domiciliary long-term oxygen therapy (LTOT) is usually supplied by means of oxygen concentrators (OCs). Various factors that determine the efficacy of such a treatment were evaluated. Sixty-three patients, arbitrarily selected from lists of health care providers, were visited at home by a biomedical engineer and a pulmonary function technician. The evaluation consisted of: i) responses to a directed questionnaire, ii) assessment of the OC output characteristics, and iii) measurement of the patient's oxygen saturation (SaO2) at rest with and without oxygen supplement. Only 33% of patients received oxygen treatment for the recommended 12-24 hours/day and 5% of patients waited the recommended 10 minutes of OC warm-up before connection. Filters were cleaned weekly by only 30% of patients and the concentrator was serviced 3-4 times a year in 25% of cases. The OC was thought to be unduly noisy by 24% of patients and connecting tubing of less than 6 meters was fitted to 90% of OCs, thereby limiting patient mobility. Most of the OCs did not yield the recommended oxygen concentration and the flow rate meters on them tended to underread. Therefore, only 22% of patients received the prescribed oxygen supplement. Whilst breathing room air, a substantial proportion of patients had an SaO2 >90%. Improvements are clearly required in terms of medical indications for LTOT, patient education and supervision, supply and maintenance of concentrators and related equipment.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
家用吸氧器长期氧疗效果评价。
居家长期氧疗(LTOT)通常由氧浓缩器(OCs)提供。评估了决定这种治疗效果的各种因素。一名生物医学工程师和一名肺功能技术员到63名患者家中进行了拜访,这些患者是从医疗保健提供者名单中任意挑选出来的。评估包括:i)直接问卷的回答,ii)评估OC输出特征,以及iii)测量患者在休息时的氧饱和度(SaO2),有无补充氧气。只有33%的患者接受了推荐的12-24小时/天的氧气治疗,5%的患者在连接前等待了推荐的10分钟的OC预热。只有30%的患者每周清洗过滤器,25%的患者每年使用浓缩器3-4次。24%的患者认为OC噪音过大,90%的OC安装了小于6米的连接管,从而限制了患者的活动能力。大多数OCs不能产生推荐的氧浓度,其上的流速计往往读数不足。因此,只有22%的患者接受了规定的氧气补充。当呼吸室内空气时,相当比例的患者SaO2 >90%。在lot的医学指征、患者教育和监督、浓缩器和相关设备的供应和维护等方面显然需要改进。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Cryptophthalmos syndrome. Concentration camp survivors in Norway and Israel. Open-access endoscopy of the upper gastrointestinal tract: is it indicated and efficient? Retrospective and prospective studies in an Israeli population. Colonoscopic resection of large colonic polyps--a prospective study. Heart rate variability in patients with secondary amyloidosis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1