Chest ACCP Education Calendar
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Guest Access | Sign In via User Name/Password
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Free
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Article Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Cottrell, J. J.
Right arrow Articles by Garland, J. L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Cottrell, J. J.
Right arrow Articles by Garland, J. L.
(Chest. 1995;107:358-361.)
© 1995 American College of Chest Physicians

Home Oxygen Therapy

A Comparison of 2- vs 6-Month Patient Reevaluation

Joseph J. Cottrell MD, FCCP1; Diana Openbrier PhD1; Judith R. Lave PhD1; Colleen Paul MSN1; and Jeffrey L. Garland MD1

1 From the Division of Pulmonary, Allergy, and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center; and the Schools of Medicine and Public Health, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center

Study objective: To contrast the effectiveness of 2-vs 6-month reevaluation intervals on both clinical outcome and cost in patients requiring continuous home oxygen therapy (HOT).

Design: Prospective, randomized clinical trial.

Setting: The outpatient program of a university-affiliated Veterans Affairs Medical Center (VAMC) Pulmonary Service.

Patients:Fifty patients were chosen from among a cohort of 200 patients currently enrolled in our HOT program. All met specific arterial blood gas criteria, were able to give informed consent, had at least 6 months of prior HOT usage, and did not have any illness expected to independently shorten life expectancy.

Interventions: Baseline resting oxygen flow rates were prescribed based on the results of arterial blood gas measurements so as to attain a PaO2 > 60 mm Hg. Flow rates were adjusted as needed during a 12-min walk to maintain pulse oximetry readings > 90%. No adjustments in baseline flow rates were made during sleep. Identical evaluations were repeated at either 2-or 6-month intervals.

Measurements and results: At 1-year follow-up, there were no significant differences between the 2-and 6-month groups in any of the clinical outcome parameters measured, ie, number of emergency department visits, number of hospitalizations, number of days hospitalized, or mortality. Total costs were not significantly different between the two groups. Evaluation costs were less in the 6-month follow-up group.

Conclusions: After attaining stability following at least 6 months of continuous HOT usage, patients receiving continuous HOT need not be routinely reevaluated more frequently than every 6 months.

Key Words: chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases • health services research • outcomes research • oxygen

Submitted on August 16, 1993
Accepted on May 26, 1994




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 BMJHome page
J. A Barber and S. G Thompson
Analysis and interpretation of cost data in randomised controlled trials: review of published studies
BMJ, October 31, 1998; 317(7167): 1195 - 1200.
[Abstract] [Full Text]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1995 by the American College of Chest Physicians.