The Efficacy of High-flow Oxygen Versus Conventional Oxygen for Asthma Control: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Studies

Abstract

\n Introduction: The efficacy of high-flow oxygen versus conventional oxygen therapy for asthma control remains controversial. We conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to explore the influence of high-flow oxygen versus conventional oxygen therapy on asthma control. Methods: We have searched PubMed, EMbase, Web of science, EBSCO, and Cochrane library databases through May 2021 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the efficacy of high-flow oxygen versus conventional oxygen therapy for asthma control. This meta-analysis is performed using the random-effect model.Results: Four RCTs are included in the meta-analysis. Overall, compared with conventional oxygen therapy for asthma, high-flow oxygen is associated with significantly lower dyspnea score (SMD=-0.63; 95% CI=-1.08 to -0.17; P=0.008), but reveals no remarkable influence on PaCO2 (SMD=0.28; 95% CI=-0.22 to 0.77; P=0.28), PaO2 (SMD=0.44; 95% CI=-1.34 to 2.22; P=0.63), intubation (OR=1.09; 95% CI=0.15 to 8.21; P=0.93) or hospital length of stay (SMD=-0.07; 95% CI=-0.41 to 0.27; P=0.67). Conclusions: High-flow oxygen may benefit to reduce dyspnea score than conventional oxygen therapy for asthma.