High-Flow Oxygen and High-Flow Air for Dyspnea in Hospitalized Patients with Cancer: A Pilot Crossover Randomized Clinical Trial

Author:

Hui David1,Hernandez Farley1,Urbauer Diana2,Thomas Saji3,Lu Zhanni1,Elsayem Ahmed4,Bruera Eduardo1

Affiliation:

1. Department of Palliative Care, Rehabilitation and Integrative Medicine, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA

2. Department of Biostatistics, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA

3. Department of Respiratory Care, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA

4. Department of Emergency Medicine, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA

Abstract

Abstract Background The effect of high-flow oxygen (HFOx) and high-flow air (HFAir) on dyspnea in nonhypoxemic patients is not known. We assessed the effect of HFOx, HFAir, low-flow oxygen (LFOx), and low-flow air (LFAir) on dyspnea. Subjects, Materials, and Methods This double-blind, 4×4 crossover clinical trial enrolled hospitalized patients with cancer who were dyspneic at rest and nonhypoxemic (oxygen saturation >90% on room air). Patients were randomized to 10 minutes of HFOx, HFAir, LFOx, and LFAir in different orders. The flow rate was titrated between 20–60 L/minute in the high-flow interventions and 2 L/minute in the low-flow interventions. The primary outcome was dyspnea numeric rating scale (NRS) “now” where 0 = none and 10 = worst. Results Seventeen patients (mean age 51 years, 58% female) completed 55 interventions in a random order. The absolute change of dyspnea NRS between 0 and 10 minutes was −1.8 (SD 1.7) for HFOx, −1.8 (2.0) for HFAir, −0.5 (0.8) for LFOx, and − 0.6 (1.2) for LFAir. In mixed model analysis, HFOx provided greater dyspnea relief than LFOx (mean difference [95% confidence interval] −0.80 [−1.45, −0.15]; p = .02) and LFAir (−1.24 [−1.90, −0.57]; p < .001). HFAir also provided significantly greater dyspnea relief than LFOx (−0.95 [−1.61, −0.30]; p = .005) and LFAir (−1.39 [−2.05, −0.73]; p < .001). HFOx was well tolerated. Seven (54%) patients who tried all interventions blindly preferred HFOx and four (31%) preferred HFAir. Conclusion We found that HFOx and HFAir provided a rapid and clinically significant reduction of dyspnea at rest in hospitalized nonhypoxemic patients with cancer. Larger studies are needed to confirm these findings (Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02932332). Implications for Practice This double-blind, 4×4 crossover trial examined the effect of oxygen or air delivered at high- or low-flow rates on dyspnea in hospitalized nonhypoxemic patients with cancer. High-flow oxygen and high-flow air were significantly better at reducing dyspnea than low-flow oxygen/air, supporting a role for palliation beyond oxygenation.

Funder

Andrew Sabin Family Fellowship Award

National Cancer Institute

National Institutes of Health

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Cancer Research,Oncology

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3