便携式氧气浓缩器的患者使用模式。

IF 2.3 Q2 RESPIRATORY SYSTEM
Pulmonary Therapy Pub Date : 2024-03-01 Epub Date: 2024-02-07 DOI:10.1007/s41030-024-00252-4
Stanislav Glezer, Michael W Hess, Alan K Kamada
{"title":"便携式氧气浓缩器的患者使用模式。","authors":"Stanislav Glezer, Michael W Hess, Alan K Kamada","doi":"10.1007/s41030-024-00252-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Portable oxygen concentrators (POCs) are medical devices that provide supplemental oxygen to patients requiring long-term oxygen therapy. However, little information is available on day-to-day patterns of how or even whether patients actively switch between their POC mobility features and flow setting options.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective analysis was conducted to assess POC usage among patients who used an Inogen One G5 POC in the USA. This study aimed (1) to describe the patterns of use of POCs, (2) to analyze their compatibility with the prescribed oxygen therapy settings, and (3) to demonstrate the contribution of POC usage to get a standardized long-term oxygen therapy (LTOT). Data were directly downloaded from the devices returned for service or at the end of the Medicare Durable Medical Equipment rental period and streamed via a mobile application from 2018 to 2022. Daily usage, disconnections from the device, use of prescribed pulse delivery settings, breaths per minute, power sources, and movement with the POC were assessed. Device alert histories were also examined.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Data revealed a mean daily usage of 4.29 ± 3.23 h/day, ranging from 0.35 to 15.52 h/day. The prescribed pulse delivery setting was used by 31.34% of patients for at least 80% of their POC use time. When the POC was on battery power, patients were moving/mobile 41.99 ± 33.33% of the time. On the basis of the device-generated alerts, some patients continued to use their POC very close to or even beyond the lifetime of the column/sieve bed. Alerts or alarms potentially requiring repair occurred at a rate of 1.63 events per 100 years of use, indicating that device reliability did not significantly influence the use patterns.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Patients used their POCs when mobile and at rest. A large proportion of patients adjust their POC settings during the day, which potentially indicates the need for the dynamic individualization of oxygen dose delivery to match activities of daily living or sleep. Patients require follow-up to ensure timely replacement of POC columns.</p>","PeriodicalId":20919,"journal":{"name":"Pulmonary Therapy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10881926/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Patient Use Patterns of Portable Oxygen Concentrators.\",\"authors\":\"Stanislav Glezer, Michael W Hess, Alan K Kamada\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s41030-024-00252-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Portable oxygen concentrators (POCs) are medical devices that provide supplemental oxygen to patients requiring long-term oxygen therapy. However, little information is available on day-to-day patterns of how or even whether patients actively switch between their POC mobility features and flow setting options.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective analysis was conducted to assess POC usage among patients who used an Inogen One G5 POC in the USA. This study aimed (1) to describe the patterns of use of POCs, (2) to analyze their compatibility with the prescribed oxygen therapy settings, and (3) to demonstrate the contribution of POC usage to get a standardized long-term oxygen therapy (LTOT). Data were directly downloaded from the devices returned for service or at the end of the Medicare Durable Medical Equipment rental period and streamed via a mobile application from 2018 to 2022. Daily usage, disconnections from the device, use of prescribed pulse delivery settings, breaths per minute, power sources, and movement with the POC were assessed. Device alert histories were also examined.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Data revealed a mean daily usage of 4.29 ± 3.23 h/day, ranging from 0.35 to 15.52 h/day. The prescribed pulse delivery setting was used by 31.34% of patients for at least 80% of their POC use time. When the POC was on battery power, patients were moving/mobile 41.99 ± 33.33% of the time. On the basis of the device-generated alerts, some patients continued to use their POC very close to or even beyond the lifetime of the column/sieve bed. Alerts or alarms potentially requiring repair occurred at a rate of 1.63 events per 100 years of use, indicating that device reliability did not significantly influence the use patterns.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Patients used their POCs when mobile and at rest. A large proportion of patients adjust their POC settings during the day, which potentially indicates the need for the dynamic individualization of oxygen dose delivery to match activities of daily living or sleep. Patients require follow-up to ensure timely replacement of POC columns.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20919,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pulmonary Therapy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10881926/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pulmonary Therapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s41030-024-00252-4\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/2/7 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pulmonary Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s41030-024-00252-4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/2/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介:便携式氧气浓缩器(POC)是为需要长期氧疗的患者提供补充氧气的医疗设备。然而,关于患者如何甚至是否主动在 POC 移动功能和流量设置选项之间切换的日常模式,却鲜有相关信息:我们进行了一项回顾性分析,以评估美国使用 Inogen One G5 POC 的患者的 POC 使用情况。这项研究的目的是:(1)描述 POC 的使用模式;(2)分析其与处方氧疗设置的兼容性;(3)证明 POC 的使用对获得标准化长期氧疗(LTOT)的贡献。从 2018 年到 2022 年,数据直接从返还服务或医疗保险耐用医疗设备租赁期结束时的设备上下载,并通过移动应用程序流式传输。对日常使用情况、设备断开连接情况、使用规定的脉搏输送设置、每分钟呼吸次数、电源以及与 POC 的移动情况进行了评估。此外,还检查了设备警报历史记录:数据显示,平均每日使用时间为 4.29 ± 3.23 小时/天,从 0.35 到 15.52 小时/天不等。31.34%的患者在至少 80% 的 POC 使用时间内使用了规定的脉搏输送设置。当 POC 使用电池供电时,患者有 41.99 ± 33.33% 的时间在移动/移动。根据设备发出的警报,一些患者在接近甚至超过柱状/筛床使用寿命的情况下继续使用 POC。可能需要维修的警报或报警发生率为每 100 年使用 1.63 次,这表明设备的可靠性对使用模式没有显著影响:结论:患者在移动和休息时都会使用 POC。很大一部分患者会在白天调整他们的 POC 设置,这可能表明有必要根据日常生活或睡眠活动动态调整氧气剂量。患者需要随访,以确保及时更换 POC 柱。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Patient Use Patterns of Portable Oxygen Concentrators.

Introduction: Portable oxygen concentrators (POCs) are medical devices that provide supplemental oxygen to patients requiring long-term oxygen therapy. However, little information is available on day-to-day patterns of how or even whether patients actively switch between their POC mobility features and flow setting options.

Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted to assess POC usage among patients who used an Inogen One G5 POC in the USA. This study aimed (1) to describe the patterns of use of POCs, (2) to analyze their compatibility with the prescribed oxygen therapy settings, and (3) to demonstrate the contribution of POC usage to get a standardized long-term oxygen therapy (LTOT). Data were directly downloaded from the devices returned for service or at the end of the Medicare Durable Medical Equipment rental period and streamed via a mobile application from 2018 to 2022. Daily usage, disconnections from the device, use of prescribed pulse delivery settings, breaths per minute, power sources, and movement with the POC were assessed. Device alert histories were also examined.

Results: Data revealed a mean daily usage of 4.29 ± 3.23 h/day, ranging from 0.35 to 15.52 h/day. The prescribed pulse delivery setting was used by 31.34% of patients for at least 80% of their POC use time. When the POC was on battery power, patients were moving/mobile 41.99 ± 33.33% of the time. On the basis of the device-generated alerts, some patients continued to use their POC very close to or even beyond the lifetime of the column/sieve bed. Alerts or alarms potentially requiring repair occurred at a rate of 1.63 events per 100 years of use, indicating that device reliability did not significantly influence the use patterns.

Conclusion: Patients used their POCs when mobile and at rest. A large proportion of patients adjust their POC settings during the day, which potentially indicates the need for the dynamic individualization of oxygen dose delivery to match activities of daily living or sleep. Patients require follow-up to ensure timely replacement of POC columns.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Pulmonary Therapy
Pulmonary Therapy Medicine-Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
3.30%
发文量
24
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊介绍: Aims and Scope Pulmonary Therapy is an international, open access, peer-reviewed (single-blind), and rapid publication journal. The scope of the journal is broad and will consider all scientifically sound research from pre-clinical, clinical (all phases), observational, real-world, and health outcomes research around the use of pulmonary therapies, devices, and surgical techniques. Areas of focus include, but are not limited to: asthma; chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis; pulmonary hypertension; cystic fibrosis; lung cancer; respiratory tract disorders; allergic rhinitis and other respiratory allergies; influenza, pneumococcal infection, respiratory syncytial virus and other respiratory infections; and inhalers and other device therapies. The journal is of interest to a broad audience of pharmaceutical and healthcare professionals and publishes original research, reviews, case reports/series, trial protocols and short communications such as commentaries and editorials. Pulmonary Therapy will consider all scientifically sound research be it positive, confirmatory or negative data. Submissions are welcomed whether they relate to an international and/or a country-specific audience, something that is crucially important when researchers are trying to target more specific patient populations. This inclusive approach allows the journal to assist in the dissemination of quality research, which may be considered of insufficient interest by other journals. Rapid Publication The journal’s publication timelines aim for a rapid peer review of 2 weeks. If an article is accepted it will be published 3–4 weeks from acceptance. The rapid timelines are achieved through the combination of a dedicated in-house editorial team, who manage article workflow, and an extensive Editorial and Advisory Board who assist with peer review. This allows the journal to support the rapid dissemination of research, whilst still providing robust peer review. Combined with the journal’s open access model this allows for the rapid, efficient communication of the latest research and reviews, fostering the advancement of pulmonary therapies. Open Access All articles published by Pulmonary Therapy are open access. Personal Service The journal’s dedicated in-house editorial team offer a personal “concierge service” meaning authors will always have an editorial contact able to update them on the status of their manuscript. The editorial team check all manuscripts to ensure that articles conform to the most recent COPE, GPP and ICMJE publishing guidelines. This supports the publication of ethically sound and transparent research. Digital Features and Plain Language Summaries Pulmonary Therapy offers a range of additional features designed to increase the visibility, readership and educational value of the journal’s content. Each article is accompanied by key summary points, giving a time-efficient overview of the content to a wide readership. Articles may be accompanied by plain language summaries to assist readers who have some knowledge of, but not in-depth expertise in, the area to understand the scientific content and overall implications of the article. The journal also provides the option to include various types of digital features including animated abstracts, video abstracts, slide decks, audio slides, instructional videos, infographics, podcasts and animations. All additional features are peer reviewed to the same high standard as the article itself. If you consider that your paper would benefit from the inclusion of a digital feature, please let us know. Our editorial team are able to create high-quality slide decks and infographics in-house, and video abstracts through our partner Research Square, and would be happy to assist in any way we can. For further information about digital features, please contact the journal editor (see ‘Contact the Journal’ for email address), and see the ‘Guidelines for digital features and plain language summaries’ document under ‘Submission guidelines’. For examples of digital features please visit our showcase page https://springerhealthcare.com/expertise/publishing-digital-features/ Publication Fees Upon acceptance of an article, authors will be required to pay the mandatory Rapid Service Fee of €4500/ $5100/ £3650. The journal will consider fee discounts and waivers for developing countries and this is decided on a case by case basis. Peer Review Process Upon submission, manuscripts are assessed by the editorial team to ensure they fit within the aims and scope of the journal and are also checked for plagiarism. All suitable submissions are then subject to a comprehensive single-blind peer review. Reviewers are selected based on their relevant expertise and publication history in the subject area. The journal has an extensive pool of editorial and advisory board members who have been selected to assist with peer review based on the afore-mentioned criteria. At least two extensive reviews are required to make the editorial decision, with the exception of some article types such as Commentaries, Editorials, and Letters which are generally reviewed by one member of the Editorial Board. Where reviewer recommendations are conflicted, the editorial board will be contacted for further advice and a presiding decision. Manuscripts are then either accepted, rejected or authors are required to make major or minor revisions (both reviewer comments and editorial comments may need to be addressed). Once a revised manuscript is re-submitted, it is assessed along with the responses to reviewer comments and if it has been adequately revised it will be accepted for publication. Accepted manuscripts are then copyedited and typeset by the production team before online publication. Appeals against decisions following peer review are considered on a case-by-case basis and should be sent to the journal editor. Preprints We encourage posting of preprints of primary research manuscripts on preprint servers, authors’ or institutional websites, and open communications between researchers whether on community preprint servers or preprint commenting platforms. Posting of preprints is not considered prior publication and will not jeopardize consideration in our journals. Authors should disclose details of preprint posting during the submission process or at any other point during consideration in one of our journals. Once the manuscript is published, it is the author’s responsibility to ensure that the preprint record is updated with a publication reference, including the DOI and a URL link to the published version of the article on the journal website. Please follow the link for further information on preprint sharing: https://www.springer.com/gp/authors-editors/journal-author/journal-author-helpdesk/submission/1302#c16721550 Copyright Pulmonary Therapy''s content is published open access under the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial License, which allows users to read, copy, distribute, and make derivative works for non-commercial purposes from the material, as long as the author of the original work is cited. The author assigns the exclusive right to any commercial use of the article to Springer. For more information about the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial License, click here: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0. Contact For more information about the journal, including pre-submission enquiries, please contact christopher.vautrinot@springer.com.
×
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