HEPA air filtration for asthma and COPD: lessons from randomized controlled trials.

IF 2.7
Xin Dai, Yuxi Deng, N Sabrina Idrose, Shyamali C Dharmage, Caroline J Lodge
{"title":"HEPA air filtration for asthma and COPD: lessons from randomized controlled trials.","authors":"Xin Dai, Yuxi Deng, N Sabrina Idrose, Shyamali C Dharmage, Caroline J Lodge","doi":"10.1080/17476348.2026.2735502","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>People with asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) may experience worsening respiratory symptoms during high pollution events. High-Efficiency Particulate Air (HEPA) filtration removes fine particles and may reduce indoor exposure and respiratory morbidity.</p><p><strong>Areas covered: </strong>We narratively synthesized randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of portable HEPA filtration in asthma and COPD. PubMed and Scopus were searched from inception to 5 May 2026, reference lists were updated on 10 June 2026. Trials consistently demonstrated substantial reductions in indoor PM<sub>2.5</sub>, but clinical effects were heterogeneous: several asthma trials reported improvements in symptoms, peak flow and/or quality of life, particularly in highly symptomatic or higher‑exposure subgroups, whereas most spirometric endpoints showed small or no change. Evidence for benefit in people with COPD was limited but promising. Key methodological limitations across trials included short follow‑up periods, lack of adult studies, information on device specifications, adherence measurements, economic evaluations, and under‑representation of low‑resource settings.</p><p><strong>Expert opinion: </strong>HEPA filtration warrants further evaluation in adequately powered, pragmatic RCTs with standardized device specification reporting, longer follow‑up, adherence support, prespecified primary outcomes and cost‑effectiveness analyses. Trials should include diverse populations and assess high‑exposure periods, and public clean‑air shelters to inform equitable policy for protecting vulnerable populations.</p>","PeriodicalId":94007,"journal":{"name":"Expert review of respiratory medicine","volume":" ","pages":"1-15"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Expert review of respiratory medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17476348.2026.2735502","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

Introduction: People with asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) may experience worsening respiratory symptoms during high pollution events. High-Efficiency Particulate Air (HEPA) filtration removes fine particles and may reduce indoor exposure and respiratory morbidity.

Areas covered: We narratively synthesized randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of portable HEPA filtration in asthma and COPD. PubMed and Scopus were searched from inception to 5 May 2026, reference lists were updated on 10 June 2026. Trials consistently demonstrated substantial reductions in indoor PM2.5, but clinical effects were heterogeneous: several asthma trials reported improvements in symptoms, peak flow and/or quality of life, particularly in highly symptomatic or higher‑exposure subgroups, whereas most spirometric endpoints showed small or no change. Evidence for benefit in people with COPD was limited but promising. Key methodological limitations across trials included short follow‑up periods, lack of adult studies, information on device specifications, adherence measurements, economic evaluations, and under‑representation of low‑resource settings.

Expert opinion: HEPA filtration warrants further evaluation in adequately powered, pragmatic RCTs with standardized device specification reporting, longer follow‑up, adherence support, prespecified primary outcomes and cost‑effectiveness analyses. Trials should include diverse populations and assess high‑exposure periods, and public clean‑air shelters to inform equitable policy for protecting vulnerable populations.

HEPA空气过滤治疗哮喘和COPD:来自随机对照试验的经验教训。
患有哮喘和慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)的人在高污染事件期间可能会出现呼吸系统症状恶化。高效微粒空气(HEPA)过滤去除细颗粒,可能减少室内暴露和呼吸道疾病。涵盖领域:我们叙述性地综合了便携式HEPA过滤器在哮喘和COPD中的随机对照试验(rct)。PubMed和Scopus检索自成立至2026年5月5日,参考文献列表于2026年6月10日更新。试验一致表明室内PM2.5显著降低,但临床效果不尽相同:几项哮喘试验报告了症状、峰值流量和/或生活质量的改善,特别是在高症状或高暴露亚组中,而大多数肺量测定终点显示很小或没有变化。COPD患者获益的证据有限,但很有希望。主要的方法限制包括随访期短、缺乏成人研究、器械规格信息、依从性测量、经济评估和低资源环境的代表性不足。专家意见:HEPA过滤需要在足够有力的、实用的rct中进行进一步评估,这些rct具有标准化的设备规格报告、更长的随访、依从性支持、预先指定的主要结果和成本效益分析。试验应包括不同的人群并评估高暴露期和公共清洁空气庇护所,以便为保护弱势群体的公平政策提供信息。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书