• B Segard, J F Muir, J M Bédicam, C Defouilloy, and A Sautegeau.
• ANTADIR, Paris.
• Rev Mal Respir. 1992 Jan 1;9(2):197-204.

AbstractThe saturation of oxygen (SaO2) using oxygen therapy with an oxygen saving system, Optimox (CFPO) or COS 5 (Puritan, Bennett) has been compared to the SaO2 using continuous oxygen therapy. The oxygen output using the oxygen saving system was regulated in such a way as to be equivalent to the oxygen flow without the economiser. Three situations were studied: the day, the night and during effort. Ninety four patients (84 men and 10 women), aged 65.3 +/- 9.7), who were hypoxaemic (SaO2: 84.5 +/- 6.4%) coming from twelve pneumology units were included in the study. The percentage of time spent above SaO2 (T greater than 90) was used to judge the criteria of the efficacy of the oxygen therapy. T greater than 90 without (SSECO) and with the oxygen saving system (AVECO) were compared in each subject. T greater than 90 AVECO was below T greater than 90 SSECO in 52% of patients and was greater in 23% of subjects. The nasal, auditory and respiratory comfort was good whatever the period of examination for more than half of the subjects. In conclusion for an equivalent oxygen flow the addition of an oxygen saving device significantly alters the quality of diurnal and nocturnal oxygen therapy in one patient out of two.

21 keywords...

hide…