Abstract
Background:
Chronic breathlessness is a neglected symptom of advanced diseases.
Aim:
To examine the effect of airflow for chronic breathlessness relief.
Design:
Exploratory systematic review and meta-analysis.
Data sources:
Medline, CINAHL, AMED and Cochrane databases were searched (1985–2018) for observational studies or randomised controlled trials of airflow as intervention or comparator. Selection against predefined inclusion criteria, quality appraisal and data extraction was conducted by two independent reviewers with access to a third for unresolved differences. ‘Before and after’ breathlessness measures from airflow arms were analysed. Meta-analysis was carried out where possible.
Results:
In all, 16 of 78 studies (n = 929) were included: 11 randomised controlled trials of oxygen versus medical air, 4 randomised controlled trials and 1 fan cohort study. Three meta-analyses were possible: (1) Fan at rest in three studies (n = 111) offered significant benefit for breathlessness intensity (0–100 mm visual analogue scale and 0–10 numerical rating scale), mean difference −11.17 (95% confidence intervals (CI) −16.60 to −5.74), p = 0.06 I2 64%. (2) Medical air via nasal cannulae at rest in two studies (n = 89) improved breathlessness intensity (visual analogue scale), mean difference −12.0 mm, 95% CI −7.4 to −16.6, p < 0.0001 I2 = 0%. (3) Medical airflow during a constant load exercise test before and after rehabilitation (n = 29) in two studies improved breathlessness intensity (modified Borg scale, 0–10), mean difference −2.9, 95% CI −3.2 to −2.7, p < 0.0001 I2 = 0%.
Conclusion:
Airflow appears to offer meaningful relief of chronic breathlessness and should be considered as an adjunct treatment in the management of breathlessness.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
