Abstract
Background—The purpose of this study was to compare the ability of 3 portable oxygen concentrators (POCs) to maintain SpO2 ≥ 90% during exercise in patients with chronic lung disease (CLD).
Methods—Twenty-one participants with CLD (18 COPD, 3 PF) and documented room air exertional SpO2 ≤ 85% performed four, 6-minute walk tests (6MWTs): a control walk using the participant’s current oxygen system and prescribed exertional flow rate and 1 walk with each of the 3 POCs at maximum pulse dose setting.
Results—There was a significant interaction between POC type and time point for SpO2 measurements with higher saturations pre- and post- walk when participants used the Eclipse 3 when compared to the other POCs (all p<0.01). Participants were also able to walk further and maintain a mean SpO2 ≥ 90% while using the Eclipse 3 (both p<0.01), the device with the largest bolus size. Participants indicated that they preferred the EverGo’s physical characteristics but that the Eclipse 3 responded best to their breathing. The iGo was rated less favourably than the other 2 POCs.
Conclusions—The Eclipse 3, with the largest bolus size of the POCs tested, was best at meeting patients’ clinical needs. POC recipients should be appropriately tested during all activities of daily living to ensure adequate oxygenation. The health care provider should provide information and help direct the patient toward the most clinically appropriate oxygen system while being mindful of the patient’s preferences and lifestyle. This study was registered with clinicaltrials.gov, trial number NCT01653730.
- chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
- oxygen inhalation therapy/instrumentation
- pulmonary fibrosis
- exercise test
- ambulatory care
- walking
Footnotes
- Corresponding author cleblanc{at}ottawahospital.on.ca
Sources of financial support, This work was supported by a grant from the Institute for Rehabilitation Research and Development, The Ottawa Hospital Rehabilitation Centre. The sponsor had no role in the design of the study, the collection and analysis of the data, or preparation of the manuscript.
Conflicts of Interest: The POCs were donated by the respective manufacturers for the purpose of the study. The manufacturers had no role in the design and conduct of this study. The authors report that no potential conflicts of interest exist with any of the manufacturers or distributors of products discussed in this article.
- Copyright © 2013 by Daedalus Enterprises Inc.