These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: [Long-term oxygen therapy: which form of administration can be recommended?].
    Author: Tausendpfund C, Petro W.
    Journal: Pneumologie; 1996 Mar; 50(3):260-7. PubMed ID: 8919925.
    Abstract:
    A great variety of application devices for long-term-oxygen-therapy are being used. In order to find out which products can be especially recommended we conducted an inquiry among German lung specialists asking which devices they were preferring and why. Additionally, in a clinical study the efficiency of basic types of products has been compared. Data about patients' acceptance of different devices have been collected by another inquiry. As it turned out the most efficient models (e.g. oxygen catheters) are only accepted by a very small number of patients. So they can not be recommended for long-term-oxygen-therapy. Patients' acceptance concentrates on nasal oxygen cannulae having two tubes that lead into the nostrils but no foam pad. The product PARI 96.2020 is expecially favoured as it combines "tight fit", "soft material" and "easy handling", criteria most important for the patients. Similar models (PARI 96.2021 and Airlife), although following on the next two places, are only favoured by half as much patients. As obviously quite simple, functional products are preferred to very sophisticated and expensive ones, future development should also follow the demands of patients, not only theoretical considerations.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]