PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 1513974

Indications for long-term oxygen therapy.

Abstract

The Medical Research Council and the Nocturnal Oxygen Therapy Trial studies clearly demonstrated that long-term oxygen therapy (LTOT) for more than 15 h/day improved mortality and morbidity in a well-defined group of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. There are no similar randomised control studies in patients with other hypoxaemic lung diseases such as pulmonary fibrosis and pneumoconiosis. The prescription of oxygen for other restrictive lung disorders is complicated by hypoventilation requiring mechanical support as well as oxygen and should be restricted to special centres. The clearest indications for LTOT are for patients with cor pulmonale, hypoxic chronic bronchitis and emphysema, and in terminally ill patients who require palliation. Before LTOT is considered, the patient must be clinically stable and on appropriate optimum therapy such as antibiotics, bronchodilators, physiotherapy and having stopped smoking tobacco. Many patients first present for LTOT with profound hypoxaemia and hypercapnia during an infective, often oedematous exacerbation of their lung disease. Assessments should occur during convalescence when the patient is clinically stable. They should be shown to have a PaO2 less than 7.3 kPa and/or a PaCO2 greater than 6 kPa on two occasions at least 3 weeks apart. FEV1 should be less than 1.5 litres, and there should be a less than 15% improvement in FEV1 after bronchodilators. All patients should be assessed by an experienced chest physician. Patients with a PaO2 between 7.3 and 8 kPa who have polycythaemia, right heart failure or pulmonary hypertension may gain benefit from LTOT but this is still to be clearly proven.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

A G Stewart, P Howard. 1992. Indications for long-term oxygen therapy.. https://doi.org/10.1159/000196113

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

On the exact interval estimation for the difference in paired areas under the ROC curves.

An important measure for comparison of accuracy between two diagnostic procedures is the difference in paired areas under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. Non-parametric and maximum likelihood methods have been proposed for interval estimation for the difference in paired areas under ROC curves. However, these two methods are asymptotic procedures and their performance in finite sample sizes has not been thoroughly investigated. We propose to use the concept of generalized pivotal quantities (GPQs) to construct an exact confidence interval for the difference in paired areas under ROC curves. A simulation study is conducted to empirically investigate the probability coverage and expected length of the three methods for various combinations of sample sizes, values of the area under the ROC curve and correlations. Simulation results demonstrate that the exact confidence interval based on the concept of GPQs provides not only sufficient probability coverage but also reasonable expected length. Numerical examples using published data sets illustrate the proposed method.

Clinical Trials as Topic↗

An efficient test for the analysis of dichotomized variables when the reliability is known.

A difference in an outcome variable between the treatment groups in a trial does not necessarily mean that there is a difference in the number of patients who experience relevant improvement on that variable. When the relevant improvement corresponds with an outcome or change in outcome that exceeds a certain threshold, the outcome variable can be dichotomized. A responder is a patient whose outcome exceeds the threshold. Comparisons can be made between the number of responders in the two treatment groups using logistic regression, or some other method to evaluate binary outcomes. An important disadvantage of this approach is the loss of power. In general, it is more efficient to test the difference between the mean values. We developed a statistical test that compares response rates for a dichotomized variable. It requires that an estimate of the reliability of the outcome variable is available. Simulations showed that the test was valid and robust over a wide range of distributions and sample sizes. The power was greater than the power of a chi(2) test, which would enable substantial reduction in the sample size.

Clinical Trials as Topic↗

Sample size determination for logistic regression revisited.

There is no consensus on the approach to compute the power and sample size with logistic regression. Some authors use the likelihood ratio test; some use the test on proportions; some suggest various approximations to handle the multivariate case. We advocate the use of the Wald test since the Z-score is routinely used for statistical significance testing of regression coefficients. The null-variance formula became popular from early studies, which contradicts modern software, which utilizes the method of maximum likelihood estimation (MLE), when the variance of the MLE is estimated at the MLE, not at the null. We derive general Wald-based power and sample size formulas for logistic regression and then apply them to binary exposure and confounder to obtain a closed-form expression. These formulas are applied to minimize the total sample size in a case-control study to achieve a given power by optimizing the ratio of controls to cases. Approximately, the optimal number of controls to cases is equal to the square root of the alternative odds ratio. Our sample size and power calculations can be carried out online at www.dartmouth.edu/ approximately eugened.

Clinical Trials as Topic↗