The efficacy of high-flow oxygen versus conventional oxygen for asthma control: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies.

Abstract

Introduction:

The efficacy of high-flow oxygen versus conventional oxygen therapy for asthma control remains controversial.

Aim:

This meta-analysis aims to explore the influence of high-flow oxygen versus conventional oxygen therapy on asthma control.

Material and methods:

We have searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, EBSCO, and Cochrane library databases, and included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the efficacy of high-flow oxygen versus conventional oxygen therapy for asthma control.

Results:

Four RCTs are included in this meta-analysis. Overall, compared with conventional oxygen therapy for asthma, high-flow oxygen is associated with a significantly lower dyspnoea score (standard mean difference (SMD) = -0.63; 95% confidence interval (CI): -1.08 to -0.17; p = 0.008), but reveals no remarkable influence on PaCO2 (SMD = 0.28; 95% CI: -0.22 to 0.77; p = 0.28), PaO2 (SMD = 0.44; 95% CI: -1.34 to 2.22; p = 0.63), intubation rate (OR = 1.09; 95% CI: 0.15 to 8.21; p = 0.93) or hospital length of stay (SMD = -0.07; 95% CI: -0.41 to 0.27; p = 0.67).

Conclusions:

High-flow oxygen may benefit to reduce/may be more beneficial in reducing the dyspnoea score than conventional oxygen therapy for asthma, but shows no improvement in PaCO2, PaO2, intubation or hospital length of stay.

• Authors: Haoyue Deng, Yongpeng He, Xiaoqin Fu, Zhiqiang Mei, Yi Li
• Journal: Postepy dermatologii i alergologii (Postepy Dermatol Alergol) Vol. 39 Issue 6 Pg. 1077-1082 (Dec 2022) ISSN: 1642-395X [Print] Poland
• PMID: 36686026 (Publication Type: Journal Article)
• Copyright: Copyright: © 2022 Termedia Sp. z o. o.