Home Oxygen Therapy in Chronic Respiratory Illnesses: A Comprehensive Review
Dr Neeraj Manikath, Claude. ai
Abstract
Home oxygen therapy (HOT) represents a cornerstone intervention for patients with chronic respiratory illnesses experiencing hypoxemia. This review synthesizes current evidence on the indications, benefits, delivery methods, monitoring approaches, and challenges associated with HOT across various chronic respiratory conditions. We examine the evolving evidence base supporting HOT use in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), interstitial lung disease (ILD), pulmonary hypertension, and other respiratory conditions. Additionally, we discuss emerging technologies, healthcare delivery models, and areas requiring further research to optimize HOT implementation. Recent studies highlighting the importance of adherence, patient education, and personalized approaches to oxygen prescription are emphasized, along with the cost-effectiveness and quality-of-life implications of this intervention. This review provides clinicians with an evidence-based framework for prescribing and managing HOT to improve outcomes in patients with chronic respiratory diseases.
Introduction
Chronic respiratory diseases affect hundreds of millions of people worldwide and represent a substantial burden on healthcare systems globally. Home oxygen therapy (HOT) has been a mainstay treatment for chronic respiratory illnesses associated with hypoxemia for over four decades, following landmark trials that demonstrated survival benefits in hypoxemic patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (1,2). While the evidence base was initially established in COPD, HOT is now prescribed across numerous respiratory conditions including interstitial lung disease (ILD), pulmonary hypertension, cystic fibrosis, and bronchiectasis (3).
HOT aims to correct hypoxemia, reduce the work of breathing, decrease pulmonary hypertension, and improve exercise capacity and quality of life (4). Despite its widespread use, significant variations exist in prescription practices, reimbursement policies, and delivery models across healthcare systems (5). Furthermore, advances in oxygen delivery technology, telemonitoring capabilities, and our understanding of the physiological effects of supplemental oxygen have necessitated a reassessment of how HOT is implemented in clinical practice.
This review examines the current evidence for HOT across various chronic respiratory conditions, analyzes optimal delivery methods and monitoring approaches, and discusses emerging trends and challenges in this field. We aim to provide healthcare professionals with updated, evidence-based guidance on HOT prescription and management to optimize patient outcomes.
Physiological Rationale for Oxygen Therapy
The primary goal of oxygen therapy is to correct hypoxemia, defined as reduced oxygen levels in the blood. Chronic hypoxemia triggers compensatory mechanisms including pulmonary vasoconstriction, erythrocytosis, and increased cardiopulmonary workload, which can lead to cor pulmonale, right heart failure, and decreased exercise capacity (6). Supplemental oxygen counteracts these physiological derangements through several mechanisms:
1. Improved oxygen delivery: By increasing the fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO₂), HOT enhances alveolar oxygen tension and oxygen transfer across the alveolar-capillary membrane (7).
2. Reduced pulmonary vascular resistance: Oxygen therapy attenuates hypoxic pulmonary vasoconstriction, potentially reducing pulmonary hypertension and right ventricular afterload (8).
3. Decreased respiratory drive: Correction of hypoxemia reduces stimulation of peripheral chemoreceptors, potentially decreasing dyspnea and the work of breathing (9).
4. Improved exercise capacity: Supplemental oxygen during exercise can decrease dynamic hyperinflation in COPD patients and improve exercise tolerance (10).
5. Reduced oxidative stress: While paradoxical, appropriately titrated oxygen therapy may reduce systemic inflammation and oxidative stress markers associated with chronic hypoxemia (11).
Understanding these physiological mechanisms is crucial for determining appropriate oxygen prescription parameters and interpreting patient responses to therapy.
Indications for Home Oxygen Therapy
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD)
The strongest evidence for survival benefit with long-term oxygen therapy (LTOT) comes from two landmark randomized controlled trials: the British Medical Research Council (MRC) study and the Nocturnal Oxygen Therapy Trial (NOTT) (1,2). These studies demonstrated mortality benefits in COPD patients with severe resting hypoxemia (PaO₂ ≤55 mmHg or PaO₂ ≤59 mmHg with evidence of end-organ damage such as cor pulmonale or erythrocytosis).
Current guidelines generally recommend LTOT for COPD patients with:
- PaO₂ ≤55 mmHg or SaO₂ ≤88% at rest, or
- PaO₂ 56-59 mmHg or SaO₂ ≤89% with evidence of right heart failure, pulmonary hypertension, or polycythemia (hematocrit >55%) (12).
The Long-Term Oxygen Treatment Trial (LOTT) challenged previous assumptions by finding no benefit of oxygen therapy in COPD patients with moderate resting or exercise-induced desaturation (13). However, subgroup analyses suggest certain populations may still benefit, highlighting the need for individualized assessment (14).
Interstitial Lung Disease (ILD)
While high-quality randomized controlled trials are lacking for ILD, observational data support HOT use in ILD patients with hypoxemia using similar criteria as for COPD (15). In idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF), supplemental oxygen has been associated with improved exercise capacity and quality of life (16). Current practice generally follows the same prescription thresholds as for COPD, although some experts advocate for earlier intervention given the poor prognosis and rapid progression of certain ILDs (17).
Pulmonary Hypertension
In pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) and other forms of pulmonary hypertension, oxygen therapy is recommended for patients with hypoxemia to reduce pulmonary vascular resistance and right ventricular workload (18). There is particular emphasis on nocturnal oxygen therapy in these patients, as sleep-associated desaturation may exacerbate pulmonary hypertension (19).
Other Conditions
HOT is also prescribed in:
- Cystic fibrosis: Similar criteria as COPD, with emphasis on supporting exercise and activities of daily living (20).
- Bronchiectasis: Based on hypoxemia thresholds comparable to COPD (21).
- Neuromuscular disorders with respiratory involvement: May focus on nocturnal support and palliative symptom relief (22).
- Palliative care: Oxygen may be used for symptomatic relief of dyspnea even in the absence of hypoxemia, although evidence for this practice is mixed (23).
Assessment and Prescription of Home Oxygen
Initial Assessment
Comprehensive assessment before prescribing HOT should include:
1. Arterial blood gas (ABG) analysis: The gold standard for assessing oxygenation status, ideally performed while the patient is breathing room air and in a stable clinical state (at least 4-6 weeks after an exacerbation) (24).
2. Pulse oximetry: While less accurate than ABG, continuous pulse oximetry may help assess oxygen saturation during various activities and sleep (25).
3. Exercise assessment: Six-minute walk test (6MWT) or other functional tests with continuous oximetry to evaluate exercise-induced desaturation (26).
4. Overnight oximetry: To identify nocturnal hypoxemia, particularly in patients with normal daytime oxygenation (27).
5. Assessment of comorbidities: Particularly cardiac conditions that may influence oxygen requirements (28).
Prescription Parameters
HOT prescription should specify:
1. Flow rate or oxygen percentage: Titrated to achieve SpO₂ ≥90% or PaO₂ ≥60 mmHg, or individualized targets based on patient factors (29).
2. Duration of use: LTOT is typically prescribed for ≥15-18 hours/day, including nighttime hours, based on NOTT findings showing greater benefit with continuous versus nocturnal-only use (2).
3. Delivery method: Selection of appropriate devices (concentrators, liquid oxygen, compressed gas) and interfaces (nasal cannula, mask, transtracheal delivery) based on patient needs and lifestyle (30).
4. Activity-specific settings: Different flow rates may be needed for rest, exercise, and sleep (31).
5. Ambulatory requirements: Assessment of mobility needs and appropriate portable systems (32).
Delivery Systems and Technologies
Stationary Systems
1. Oxygen concentrators: These devices extract oxygen from ambient air using zeolite molecular sieves. Modern concentrators are energy-efficient, relatively quiet, and can deliver oxygen flows up to 10 L/min with concentrations of 87-95% (33). High-flow concentrators capable of delivering up to 15 L/min are available for patients with higher oxygen requirements.
2. Liquid oxygen systems: Comprised of a stationary reservoir and refillable portable units. These systems store oxygen in liquid form at extremely cold temperatures, converting it to gas for patient use. They provide higher purity oxygen (>99%) and can accommodate high flow rates, but are more expensive and require regular deliveries (34).
3. Compressed oxygen cylinders: Typically used as backup for concentrators or for short-term therapy. Modern systems include electronic regulators that can extend cylinder life (35).
Portable Systems
1. Portable oxygen concentrators (POCs): Available in pulse-dose (delivering oxygen only during inspiration) and continuous flow models. Technological advances have reduced size and weight while improving battery life, though many units still cannot provide high flow rates (36).
2. Portable liquid systems: Offer high-purity oxygen in a relatively lightweight package but require refilling from a stationary unit (37).
3. Lightweight compressed oxygen cylinders: With advanced composite materials and conserving devices, these provide greater mobility than traditional cylinders (38).
Delivery Interfaces
1. Nasal cannulas: Standard for most patients, delivering 1-6 L/min with FiO₂ ranging from approximately 24-44% depending on flow rate and patient's breathing pattern (39).
2. High-flow nasal cannulas (HFNC): Increasingly used in home settings for patients requiring higher flow rates. These systems deliver heated and humidified oxygen at flows up to 60 L/min, providing some level of positive pressure and reducing anatomical dead space (40).
3. Transtracheal oxygen catheters: Surgically implanted catheters that deliver oxygen directly to the trachea, increasing efficiency and potentially reducing flow requirements by 50%. Despite advantages including improved cosmesis and reduced nasal complications, their use has declined due to complication risks and maintenance requirements (41).
4. Reservoir cannulas and masks: Conserving devices that store oxygen during exhalation for delivery during the subsequent inspiration, potentially increasing efficiency by 2-4 times compared to standard cannulas (42).
Oxygen-Conserving Technologies
1. Pulse-dose delivery systems: Deliver a bolus of oxygen at the beginning of inspiration rather than continuously, potentially reducing oxygen usage by 50-75% (43).
2. Demand oxygen delivery systems (DODS): More sophisticated than simple pulse-dose systems, these adjust delivery based on breathing pattern and can maintain consistent FiO₂ across varying respiratory rates (44).
3. Hybrid systems: Combine features of continuous flow and conserving technologies, offering efficiency while maintaining adequate oxygenation during sleep and exercise (45).
Monitoring and Follow-up
Initial Follow-up
After HOT initiation, assessment should occur within 1-3 months to evaluate:
- Adherence to prescribed regimen
- Symptom improvement
- Oxygenation status on the prescribed flow rate
- Equipment functioning and patient competence with use
- Development of complications (46)
Long-term Monitoring
Ongoing monitoring typically includes:
1. Regular clinical assessment: Evaluating symptoms, exercise capacity, and quality of life every 3-6 months (47).
2. Oxygenation monitoring: Periodic pulse oximetry and/or ABG analysis to ensure adequacy of prescribed oxygen (48).
3. Adherence assessment: Through self-reporting, equipment hour meters, and increasingly through integrated monitoring technologies (49).
4. Equipment maintenance: Regular checks of equipment function, including oxygen purity testing for concentrators (50).
Remote Monitoring Technologies
Emerging technologies are transforming HOT monitoring:
1. Integrated monitoring systems: Modern oxygen delivery systems increasingly incorporate usage tracking, flow rate monitoring, and even patient oxygenation data (51).
2. Wearable oximeters: Connected devices allowing continuous SpO₂ monitoring with data transmission to healthcare providers (52).
3. Smartphone applications: Facilitating patient reporting, education, and communication with providers (53).
4. Telehealth platforms: Enabling remote assessments and adjustments to oxygen prescription (54).
These technologies may improve adherence, allow earlier intervention for deterioration, and reduce healthcare utilization, though evidence for their cost-effectiveness is still evolving (55).
Clinical Outcomes and Benefits
Survival Benefits
The survival benefit of LTOT is best established in COPD with severe resting hypoxemia. The MRC trial demonstrated a 5-year survival rate of 41.8% in the oxygen therapy group versus 28.7% in controls, while the NOTT study found significantly better survival with continuous versus nocturnal-only oxygen (1,2). A more recent retrospective analysis of HOT in oxygen-dependent COPD patients confirmed these findings with a hazard ratio for death of 0.57 (95% CI 0.33-0.98) compared to matched controls without HOT (56).
Evidence for survival benefits in other respiratory conditions is less robust but suggests potential advantages in severe interstitial lung disease and pulmonary hypertension (57,58).
Physiological Benefits
HOT has demonstrated several physiological benefits:
1. Reduction in pulmonary hypertension: Long-term oxygen therapy can partially reverse or prevent progression of pulmonary hypertension in chronic respiratory disease (59).
2. Decreased hematocrit: Correction of hypoxemia reduces erythropoietin stimulus and can normalize elevated hematocrit levels (60).
3. Improved exercise capacity: Particularly documented in exercise-induced hypoxemia, with enhanced endurance and peak performance (61).
4. Reduced dynamic hyperinflation: In COPD patients, oxygen supplementation during exercise can reduce hyperinflation and associated dyspnea (62).
5. Improved cognitive function: Correction of hypoxemia may improve neuropsychological performance and sleep quality (63).
Quality of Life and Functional Status
Impact on quality of life (QoL) has shown mixed results:
1. Disease-specific QoL measures: Some studies show improvements in St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) and Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire (CRQ) scores with adequate HOT use (64).
2. Symptom burden: Consistent evidence for reduced dyspnea with appropriately prescribed oxygen (65).
3. Functional independence: Improved ability to perform activities of daily living, particularly with ambulatory oxygen (66).
4. Sleep quality: Improvement in sleep architecture and quality with correction of nocturnal hypoxemia (67).
The heterogeneity in QoL outcomes likely reflects variations in adherence, appropriate prescription, and the multifactorial nature of quality of life in chronic respiratory disease (68).
Healthcare Utilization
HOT may impact healthcare utilization through several mechanisms:
1. Hospitalization rates: Some studies suggest reduced hospital admissions with appropriate HOT use, particularly in COPD (69).
2. Exacerbation frequency: Mixed evidence regarding impact on acute exacerbations, with some studies showing reduced frequency and others showing no difference (70).
3. Healthcare costs: While HOT represents a significant direct cost, cost-effectiveness analyses generally support its use in appropriately selected patients when considering reduced hospitalizations and improved quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) (71).
Special Considerations
Exercise and Ambulatory Oxygen
Ambulatory oxygen is prescribed for patients who:
- Use LTOT and wish to maintain mobility
- Demonstrate exercise-induced desaturation without resting hypoxemia
- Show improved exercise performance with supplemental oxygen
The evidence for ambulatory oxygen in patients without resting hypoxemia remains controversial. The LOTT trial found no benefit in patients with moderate resting or exercise-induced desaturation (13). However, individual patients may show meaningful improvements in exercise capacity and symptoms (72).
Prescription should be based on titration during functional exercise tests, with demonstration of improved performance and symptom relief (73). Modern portable delivery systems have improved convenience but still face limitations in weight, duration, and flow capabilities (74).
Air Travel
Commercial aircraft typically maintain cabin pressure equivalent to 5,000-8,000 feet altitude, resulting in reduced partial pressure of oxygen. Patients requiring HOT and those with marginal oxygenation status may need:
1. Pre-flight assessment: Hypoxic challenge testing or altitude simulation using the 40% FiO₂ to 15% FiO₂ equation to predict in-flight PaO₂ (75).
2. Supplemental in-flight oxygen: Arranged in advance with airlines, with specific flow rates determined by pre-flight assessment (76).
3. Portable oxygen concentrator use: Airlines increasingly permit approved POCs during flights (77).
Guidelines recommend in-flight oxygen for patients with resting SpO₂ ≤95% at sea level and those with risk factors including severe COPD, ILD, pulmonary hypertension, or recent exacerbation (78).
Palliative Care Settings
Oxygen use in palliative care presents unique considerations:
1. Symptomatic relief of dyspnea: Evidence suggests that oxygen may not be superior to air for dyspnea relief in non-hypoxemic patients, though individual responses vary (79).
2.Fan therapy: Simple fan use directed at the face may provide similar symptomatic relief through trigeminal nerve stimulation (80).
3. Balancing benefits against burdens: The potential psychological burden, reduced mobility, and social isolation associated with oxygen equipment must be considered (81).
4. Quality of life focus: Emphasis shifts from physiological targets to symptom management and patient priorities (82).
Current recommendations suggest a trial of oxygen therapy in palliative care patients with refractory dyspnea, with continuation based on symptomatic benefit rather than oxygenation targets (83).
Pediatric Considerations
HOT in children with chronic respiratory conditions requires specialized approaches:
1. Developmental considerations: Equipment and interfaces must be age-appropriate, and monitoring strategies must account for developmental stages (84).
2. Growth and development: Oxygen requirements may change rapidly with growth, requiring more frequent reassessment (85).
3. Educational needs: Supporting normal education and socialization while maintaining therapy (86).
4. Family dynamics: Greater emphasis on family education and support systems (87).
Conditions commonly requiring HOT in pediatric populations include bronchopulmonary dysplasia, cystic fibrosis, pulmonary hypertension, and neuromuscular disorders with respiratory involvement (88).
Adherence and Patient Education
Adherence Challenges
Despite proven benefits, adherence to prescribed HOT regimens remains suboptimal, with studies reporting average daily usage of 45-70% of prescribed hours (89). Barriers to adherence include:
1. Physical barriers: Equipment weight, noise, physical discomfort, and mobility restrictions (90).
2. Psychological factors: Embarrassment, perceived stigma, anxiety, and depression (91).
3. Knowledge deficits: Misunderstanding of proper use, benefits, and importance of adherence (92).
4. System barriers: Inadequate follow-up, equipment maintenance issues, and reimbursement challenges (93).
Improving Adherence
Effective strategies to enhance adherence include:
1. Comprehensive education: Clear explanation of the rationale, benefits, and proper use of oxygen equipment (94).
2. Motivational interviewing: Patient-centered approach addressing ambivalence about therapy (95).
3. Addressing practical barriers: Optimizing equipment selection, home setup, and resolving physical complaints (96).
4. Psychological support: Addressing anxiety, depression, and perceived stigma associated with oxygen use (97).
5. Remote monitoring with feedback: Providing patients and providers with adherence data to guide interventions (98).
6. Caregiver education: Involving family members or caregivers in educational efforts (99).
Structured Educational Programs
Formal patient education programs typically include:
1. Initial intensive education: Hands-on training with equipment, written materials, and demonstration-return demonstration (100).
2. Follow-up reinforcement: Scheduled reassessment of technique and understanding (101).
3. Problem-solving strategies: Addressing common issues such as nasal irritation, equipment failures, and travel concerns (102).
4. Peer support: Connection with other HOT users through support groups or mentoring programs (103).
5. Digital resources: Video tutorials, smartphone applications, and online communities (104).
Studies suggest that structured educational interventions can improve adherence by 21-50% compared to standard care (105).
## Emerging Trends and Future Directions
### Precision Medicine Approaches
The future of HOT may involve more individualized prescription based on:
1. **Phenotyping**: Identifying responder populations based on clinical, physiological, and genetic characteristics (106).
2. **Dynamic prescription**: Varying oxygen delivery based on activity, time of day, and physiological status rather than fixed flow rates (107).
3. **Predictive modeling**: Using artificial intelligence to predict optimal oxygen prescription parameters based on patient characteristics (108).
### Technological Innovations
Emerging technologies likely to impact HOT include:
1. Smart delivery systems: Oxygen sources that automatically adjust flow based on activity level, oxygenation status, and environmental factors (109).
2. Miniaturization: Continued development of smaller, lighter, longer-lasting portable systems (110).
3. Alternative gas delivery: Development of respiratory stimulants and other approaches that may complement or replace conventional oxygen therapy in certain conditions (111).
4. **Integrated monitoring**: Seamless integration of oxygen delivery systems with monitoring platforms and electronic health records (112).
Evolving Delivery Models
Healthcare delivery for HOT patients is evolving toward:
1. Telehealth integration: Remote management of HOT, including virtual visits, remote prescription adjustments, and troubleshooting (113).
2. Home-based pulmonary rehabilitation: Integration of HOT with comprehensive rehabilitation programs delivered in the home setting (114).
3. Integrated respiratory care services: Comprehensive management of respiratory patients by specialized services handling oxygen, non-invasive ventilation, and airway clearance needs (115).
4. Value-based reimbursement models: Shift from fee-for-service to outcomes-based payment for home oxygen services (116).
Research Priorities
Key areas requiring further investigation include:
1. Optimal prescription parameters for non-COPD conditions where evidence remains limited (117).
2. Patient-reported outcomes specifically validated for oxygen therapy (118).
3. Cost-effectivenessof newer technologies and delivery models (119).
4. Implementation science approaches to improve guideline adherence and reduce inappropriate variation in practice (120).
5. Novel physiological endpoints
beyond oxygenation that may better reflect therapeutic benefits (121).
Conclusion
Home oxygen therapy remains a cornerstone intervention for patients with chronic respiratory diseases and hypoxemia. While the strongest evidence supports its use in hypoxemic COPD patients, evolving research continues to refine our understanding of its benefits in other conditions. Technological advances have dramatically improved delivery options, though challenges in adherence, optimal prescription, and healthcare delivery models persist.
Future directions in HOT will likely focus on precision medicine approaches, integration of smart technologies, and development of comprehensive care models that situate oxygen therapy within broader respiratory care strategies. As our understanding of the physiological effects of chronic hypoxemia and oxygen supplementation continues to evolve, so too will our approach to this essential therapy. Healthcare providers must stay abreast of these developments to optimize outcomes for the growing population of patients with chronic respiratory illness requiring home oxygen support.
References
1. Medical Research Council Working Party. Long term domiciliary oxygen therapy in chronic hypoxic cor pulmonale complicating chronic bronchitis and emphysema. Lancet. 1981;1(8222):681-686.
2. Nocturnal Oxygen Therapy Trial Group. Continuous or nocturnal oxygen therapy in hypoxemic chronic obstructive lung disease: a clinical trial. Ann Intern Med. 1980;93(3):391-398.
3. Hardinge M, Annandale J, Bourne S, et al. British Thoracic Society guidelines for home oxygen use in adults. Thorax. 2015;70(Suppl 1):i1-i43.
4. O'Driscoll BR, Howard LS, Earis J, et al. BTS guideline for oxygen use in adults in healthcare and emergency settings. Thorax. 2017;72(Suppl 1):ii1-ii90.
5. Jacobs SS, Lindell KO, Collins EG, et al. Patient perceptions of the adequacy of supplemental oxygen therapy: results of the American Thoracic Society Nursing Assembly Oxygen Working Group survey. Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2018;15(1):24-32.
6. Kent BD, Mitchell PD, McNicholas WT. Hypoxemia in patients with COPD: cause, effects, and disease progression. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2011;6:199-208.
7. Leach RM, Treacher DF. The pulmonary physician in critical care: oxygen delivery and consumption in the critically ill. Thorax. 2002;57(2):170-177.
8. Barbera JA, Blanco I. Pulmonary hypertension in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: advances in pathophysiology and management. Drugs. 2009;69(9):1153-1171.
9. O'Donnell DE, Banzett RB, Carrieri-Kohlman V, et al. Pathophysiology of dyspnea in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a roundtable. Proc Am Thorac Soc. 2007;4(2):145-168.
10. Somfay A, Porszasz J, Lee SM, et al. Dose-response effect of oxygen on hyperinflation and exercise endurance in nonhypoxaemic COPD patients. Eur Respir J. 2001;18(1):77-84.
11. Kirkham PA, Barnes PJ. Oxidative stress in COPD. Chest. 2013;144(1):266-273.
12. Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD). Global Strategy for the Diagnosis, Management, and Prevention of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: 2023 Report. 2023.
13. Long-Term Oxygen Treatment Trial Research Group. A randomized trial of long-term oxygen for COPD with moderate desaturation. N Engl J Med. 2016;375(17):1617-1627.
14. Ekström M, Ahmadi Z, Bornefalk-Hermansson A, et al. Oxygen for breathlessness in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease who do not qualify for home oxygen therapy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;11:CD006429.
15. Visca D, Mori L, Tsipouri V, et al. Effect of ambulatory oxygen on quality of life for patients with fibrotic lung disease (AmbOx): a prospective, open-label, mixed-method, crossover randomised controlled trial. Lancet Respir Med. 2018;6(10):759-770.
16. Frank RC, Hicks S, Duck AM, et al. Ambulatory oxygen in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: of what benefit? Eur Respir J. 2012;40(1):269-270.
17. Raghu G, Collard HR, Egan JJ, et al. An official ATS/ERS/JRS/ALAT statement: idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: evidence-based guidelines for diagnosis and management. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2011;183(6):788-824.
18. Galiè N, Humbert M, Vachiery JL, et al. 2015 ESC/ERS Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of pulmonary hypertension. Eur Respir J. 2015;46(4):903-975.
19. Ulrich S, Fischler M, Speich R, et al. Sleep-related breathing disorders in patients with pulmonary hypertension. Chest. 2008;133(6):1375-1380.
20. Balfour-Lynn IM, Field DJ, Gringras P, et al. BTS guidelines for home oxygen in children. Thorax. 2009;64(Suppl 2):ii1-26.
21. Hill AT, Sullivan AL, Chalmers JD, et al. British Thoracic Society Guideline for bronchiectasis in adults. Thorax. 2019;74(Suppl 1):1-69.
22. Hull J, Aniapravan R, Chan E, et al. British Thoracic Society guideline for respiratory management of children with neuromuscular weakness. Thorax. 2012;67(Suppl 1):i1-40.
23. Abernethy AP, McDonald CF, Frith PA, et al. Effect of palliative oxygen versus room air in relief of breathlessness in patients with refractory dyspnoea: a double-blind, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2010;376(9743):784-793.
24. Leggett RJ, Flenley DC. Portable oxygen and exercise tolerance in patients with chronic hypoxic cor pulmonale. Br Med J. 1977;2(6079):84-86.
25. Jubran A. Pulse oximetry. Crit Care. 2015;19:272.
26. ATS Committee on Proficiency Standards for Clinical Pulmonary Function Laboratories. ATS statement: guidelines for the six-minute walk test. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2002;166(1):111-117.
27. Owens RL, Malhotra A. Sleep-disordered breathing and COPD: the overlap syndrome. Respir Care. 2010;55(10):1333-1344.
28. Hanania NA, Mullerova H, Locantore NW, et al. Determinants of depression in the ECLIPSE chronic obstructive pulmonary disease cohort. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2011;183(5):604-611.
29. Cranston JM, Crockett AJ, Moss JR, et al. Domiciliary oxygen for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2005;(4):CD001744.
30. McCoy R. Options for home oxygen therapy equipment: storage and metering of oxygen in the home. Respir Care. 2013;58(1):65-81.
31. Lacasse Y, Lecours R, Pelletier C, et al. Randomised trial of ambulatory oxygen in oxygen-dependent COPD. Eur Respir J. 2005;25(6):1032-1038.
32. Branson RD. Oxygen therapy in COPD. Respir Care. 2018;63(6):734-748.
33. Chatburn RL, Williams TJ. Performance comparison of 4 portable oxygen concentrators. Respir Care. 2010;55(4):433-442.
34. O'Reilly Nugent A, Kelly PT, Stanton J, et al. Measurement of oxygen concentration delivered via nasal cannulae by tracheal sampling. Respirology. 2014;19(4):538-543.
35. Bliss PL, McCoy RW, Adams AB. Characteristics of demand oxygen delivery systems: maximum output and setting recommendations. Respir Care. 2004;49(2):160-165.
36. Leblanc CJ, Lavallée LG, King JA, et al. A comparative study of 3 portable oxygen concentrators during a 6-minute walk test in patients with chronic lung disease. Respir Care. 2013;58(10):1598-1605.
37. Chen JZ, Katz IM, Pichelin M, et al. Comparison of pulsed versus continuous oxygen delivery using realistic adult nasal airway replicas. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2017;12:2559-2571.
38. Petty TL, Casaburi R. Recommendations of the Fifth Oxygen Consensus Conference. Writing and Organizing Committees. Respir Care. 2000;45(8):957-961.
39. Wettstein RB, Shelledy DC, Peters JI. Delivered oxygen concentrations using low-flow and high-flow nasal cannulas. Respir Care. 2005;50(5):604-609.
40. Nishimura M. High-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy in adults: physiological benefits, indication, clinical benefits, and adverse effects. Respir Care. 2016;61(4):529-541.
41. Christopher KL, Schwartz MD. Transtracheal oxygen therapy. Chest. 2011;139(2):435-440.
42. Bliss PL, McCoy RW, Adams AB. A bench study comparison of demand oxygen delivery systems and continuous flow oxygen. Respir Care. 1999;44(8):925-931.
43. Kerby GR, O'Donohue WJ, Romberger DJ, et al. Clinical efficacy and cost benefit of pulse flow oxygen in hospitalized patients. Chest. 1990;97(2):369-372.
44. Tiep BL, Barnett J, Schiffman G, et al. Maintaining oxygenation via demand oxygen delivery during rest and exercise. Respir Care. 2002;47(8):887-892.
