Safety of Hyperbaric Oxygenation Treatment and Evaluation of Associated Clinical Parameters: A Single-Institutional Prospective Cohort Study

Gonzalo Monge, Matías Otto-Yáñez, Nicole Norambuena, V. Martinez, Daniela Retamales, R. Torres-Castro
{"title":"Safety of Hyperbaric Oxygenation Treatment and Evaluation of Associated Clinical Parameters: A Single-Institutional Prospective Cohort Study","authors":"Gonzalo Monge, Matías Otto-Yáñez, Nicole Norambuena, V. Martinez, Daniela Retamales, R. Torres-Castro","doi":"10.21106/ijtmrph.430","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background and Objective: Adverse events (AEs) associated with hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) are uncommon and typically not serious, being the most frequent otic/sinus barotrauma. The objective of this study is to analyze the safety of the HBOT at 1.45 atmosphere absolute (ATA) and compare it with reportsat the same and higher pressures of treatment.\nAE per session was 7.1% for total AE and 4.1% for overall barotrauma. AE was reported in 28.3% of patients (n=49), with barotrauma and non-barotrauma AE in 20.3% (n=35) and 8.1% (n=14). All barotrauma was recorded as subjective (100% of ear ache without eardrum damage, Teed scale=0). The frequency of total AE obtained in our study was statistically higher for 1.5, 2, and >2 ATA. Non-barotrauma AE was also higher; the frequency of total AE obtained in our study was statistically significant for 1.5, 2, and >2 ATA but objective barotrauma was not present, and it was significantly lower than previously reported (p < 0.001). A very slow rate of pressurizations (below 1 psi/min) was associated with ear pain (OR=3.32; 95 CI%, 1.32-8.35; p < 0.001). The AEs reported in this safety surveillance prospective study are minor, and no objective barotrauma was reported. HBOT at 1.45 ATA is a safe treatment, that can be performed with a portable light and a less expensive hyperbaric chamber.\nMethods: A total of 175 patients (68 male, 107 female) were included in this prospective study. All patients were treated with HBOT at our facility from December 2019 to August 2021. For the comparative analysis, reports from studies published from 2012 to 2021 in MEDLINE EMBASE, BIREME, Lilacs, Scielo, and the Cochrane library were used. Binary variables are described in percentages with a 95% confidence interval (95% CI). Inferential analysis was performed using a bivariate analysis by calculating odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals. Statistical analyses and sample size calculations were performed with Stata version 13.0 (College Station, TX, USA).\nResults: In this study, the AE per session was 7.1% for total AE and 4.1% for overall barotrauma. AE was reported in 28.3% of patients (n=49), with barotrauma and non-barotrauma AE in 20.3% (n=35) and 8.1% (n=14), respectively. All barotrauma was recorded as subjective (100% of ear ache without eardrum damage, Teed scale=0). The frequency of total AE obtained in our study was statistically higher for 1.5, 2, and >2 ATA. Non-barotrauma AE was also higher, but objective barotrauma was not present and was significantly lower than previously reported (p <0.001). A very slow rate of pressurizations (below 1psi/minute) was associated with ear pain (OR = 3.32; 95% CI, 1.32-8.35; p <0.001).\nConclusion and Implications for Translation: In this study, the AE reported in this prospective safety surveillance study are minor, and no objective barotrauma was reported. The HBOT at 1.45 ATA is a safe treatment that can be performed with a portable lighter and a less expensive hyperbaric chamber. This study supports the hypothesis that hyperbaric oxygenation therapy at 1.45 ATA is a safe treatment, allowing for the spread and application of adjuvant treatment in different pathologies.\n \nCopyright © 2023 Monge-Martínez, et al. Published by Global Health and Education Projects, Inc. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License CC BY 4.0.","PeriodicalId":93768,"journal":{"name":"International journal of translational medical research and public health","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of translational medical research and public health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21106/ijtmrph.430","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

Background and Objective: Adverse events (AEs) associated with hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) are uncommon and typically not serious, being the most frequent otic/sinus barotrauma. The objective of this study is to analyze the safety of the HBOT at 1.45 atmosphere absolute (ATA) and compare it with reportsat the same and higher pressures of treatment. AE per session was 7.1% for total AE and 4.1% for overall barotrauma. AE was reported in 28.3% of patients (n=49), with barotrauma and non-barotrauma AE in 20.3% (n=35) and 8.1% (n=14). All barotrauma was recorded as subjective (100% of ear ache without eardrum damage, Teed scale=0). The frequency of total AE obtained in our study was statistically higher for 1.5, 2, and >2 ATA. Non-barotrauma AE was also higher; the frequency of total AE obtained in our study was statistically significant for 1.5, 2, and >2 ATA but objective barotrauma was not present, and it was significantly lower than previously reported (p < 0.001). A very slow rate of pressurizations (below 1 psi/min) was associated with ear pain (OR=3.32; 95 CI%, 1.32-8.35; p < 0.001). The AEs reported in this safety surveillance prospective study are minor, and no objective barotrauma was reported. HBOT at 1.45 ATA is a safe treatment, that can be performed with a portable light and a less expensive hyperbaric chamber. Methods: A total of 175 patients (68 male, 107 female) were included in this prospective study. All patients were treated with HBOT at our facility from December 2019 to August 2021. For the comparative analysis, reports from studies published from 2012 to 2021 in MEDLINE EMBASE, BIREME, Lilacs, Scielo, and the Cochrane library were used. Binary variables are described in percentages with a 95% confidence interval (95% CI). Inferential analysis was performed using a bivariate analysis by calculating odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals. Statistical analyses and sample size calculations were performed with Stata version 13.0 (College Station, TX, USA). Results: In this study, the AE per session was 7.1% for total AE and 4.1% for overall barotrauma. AE was reported in 28.3% of patients (n=49), with barotrauma and non-barotrauma AE in 20.3% (n=35) and 8.1% (n=14), respectively. All barotrauma was recorded as subjective (100% of ear ache without eardrum damage, Teed scale=0). The frequency of total AE obtained in our study was statistically higher for 1.5, 2, and >2 ATA. Non-barotrauma AE was also higher, but objective barotrauma was not present and was significantly lower than previously reported (p <0.001). A very slow rate of pressurizations (below 1psi/minute) was associated with ear pain (OR = 3.32; 95% CI, 1.32-8.35; p <0.001). Conclusion and Implications for Translation: In this study, the AE reported in this prospective safety surveillance study are minor, and no objective barotrauma was reported. The HBOT at 1.45 ATA is a safe treatment that can be performed with a portable lighter and a less expensive hyperbaric chamber. This study supports the hypothesis that hyperbaric oxygenation therapy at 1.45 ATA is a safe treatment, allowing for the spread and application of adjuvant treatment in different pathologies.   Copyright © 2023 Monge-Martínez, et al. Published by Global Health and Education Projects, Inc. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License CC BY 4.0.
高压氧治疗的安全性和相关临床参数的评价:一项单机构前瞻性队列研究
背景和目的:与高压氧治疗(HBOT)相关的不良事件(AE)不常见,通常不严重,是最常见的耳/窦气压伤。本研究的目的是分析在1.45绝对大气压(ATA)下使用HBOT的安全性,并将其与相同和更高治疗压力下的报告进行比较。每次治疗的总AE为7.1%,整体气压伤为4.1%。28.3%的患者(n=49)报告了AE,其中气压创伤和非气压创伤AE分别为20.3%(n=35)和8.1%(n=14)。所有气压伤都被记录为主观的(100%的耳朵疼痛,没有鼓膜损伤,Teed量表=0)。在我们的研究中,1.5、2和>2 ATA的总AE频率在统计学上更高。非气压伤AE也较高;在我们的研究中获得的总AE频率在1.5、2和>2 ATA时具有统计学意义,但不存在客观的气压损伤,并且显著低于先前报道的(p<0.001)。非常缓慢的加压速率(低于1磅/平方英寸/分钟)与耳朵疼痛相关(OR=3.32;95%CI%,1.32-8.35;p<0.001。1.45 ATA的HBOT是一种安全的治疗方法,可以使用便携式灯和较便宜的高压氧舱进行。方法:本前瞻性研究共纳入175名患者(68名男性,107名女性)。2019年12月至2021年8月,所有患者都在我们的设施接受了HBOT治疗。为了进行比较分析,使用了2012年至2021年发表在MEDLINE EMBASE、BIREME、Lilacs、Scielo和Cochrane图书馆的研究报告。二元变量以百分比描述,置信区间为95%(95%CI)。通过计算95%置信区间的比值比(OR),使用双变量分析进行推断分析。使用Stata 13.0版(美国德克萨斯州College Station)进行统计分析和样本量计算。结果:在本研究中,每次治疗的AE占总AE的7.1%,占总气压伤的4.1%。28.3%的患者(n=49)报告了AE,气压创伤和非气压创伤AE分别为20.3%(n=35)和8.1%(n=14)。所有气压伤都被记录为主观的(100%的耳朵疼痛,没有鼓膜损伤,Teed量表=0)。在我们的研究中,1.5、2和>2 ATA的总AE频率在统计学上更高。非压力性创伤AE也较高,但客观压力性创伤不存在,且显著低于先前报告的AE(p<0.001)。非常缓慢的加压速率(低于1psi/分钟)与耳朵疼痛有关(OR=3.32;95%CI,1.32-8.35;p<0.001,没有客观的气压伤报告。1.45 ATA的HBOT是一种安全的治疗方法,可以使用便携式打火机和价格较低的高压氧舱进行。这项研究支持了这样一种假设,即1.45 ATA的高压氧治疗是一种安全的治疗方法,允许辅助治疗在不同病理中的传播和应用。版权所有©2023 Monge-Martínez等人,由Global Health and Education Projects,股份有限公司出版。这是一篇根据知识共享归因许可CC by 4.0条款分发的开放获取文章。
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信