ABSTRACT
STUDY OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of supplemental oxygen therapy and high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) therapy in patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) in different clinical settings to assess its application to surgical patients in the postoperative setting. DESIGN: A systematic search was conducted on MEDLINE and other databases from 1946 to December 16th, 2021. Title and abstract screening were conducted independently, and the lead investigators resolved conflicts. Meta-analyses were performed using a random-effects model and are presented as mean difference and standardized mean difference with 95% confidence intervals. These were calculated using RevMan 5.4. PATIENTS: 1395 and 228 OSA patients underwent oxygen therapy and HFNC therapy respectively. INTERVENTIONS: Oxygen therapy and HFNC therapy. MEASUREMENTS: Apnea-hypopnea index (AHI), oxyhemoglobin saturation (SpO2), cumulative time with SPO2 < 90% (CT90). MAIN RESULTS: Twenty-seven oxygen therapy studies were included in the review, with ten randomized controlled trials (RCT), seven randomized crossovers, seven non-randomized crossovers, and three prospective cohorts. Pooled analyses showed that oxygen therapy significantly reduced AHI by 31% and increased SpO2 by 5% versus baseline, and CPAP significantly reduced AHI by 84%, and increased SpO2 by 3% versus baseline. CPAP was 53% more effective in reducing AHI than oxygen therapy, but both treatments had similar effectiveness in increasing SpO2. Nine HFNC studies were included in the review, with five prospective cohorts, three randomized crossovers, and one RCT. Pooled analyses showed that HFNC therapy significantly reduced AHI by 36% but did not substantially increase SpO2. CONCLUSIONS: Oxygen therapy effectively reduces AHI and increases SpO2 in patients with OSA. CPAP is more effective in reducing AHI than oxygen therapy. HFNC therapy is effective in reducing AHI. Although both oxygen therapy and HFNC therapy effectively reduce AHI, more research is needed to draw conclusions on clinical outcomes.
Subject(s)
Cannula , Sleep Apnea, Obstructive , Humans , Sleep Apnea, Obstructive/therapy , Oxygen Inhalation Therapy , Continuous Positive Airway Pressure , OxygenABSTRACT
STUDY OBJECTIVE: Preoperative assessment is a standard evaluation, traditionally done in-person in a preanesthesia clinic, for patients who will be undergoing a procedure involving anesthesia. Given the increased adoption of virtual care during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to review the effectiveness of virtual preoperative assessment for the evaluation of surgical patients. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. SETTING: MEDLINE (Ovid), MEDLINE InProcess/ePubs, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from the initial coverage of the respective database to May 2021. A manual citation search of Google Scholar and PubMed was conducted to identify missed articles. Continued literature surveillance was done through July 2021. PATIENTS: Patients aged 18 years and older undergoing virtual preoperative anesthesia assessment. INTERVENTIONS: Virtual preoperative assessment. MEASUREMENTS: Surgery cancellation rates, patient experience, resources saved, staff experience, success in using the data collected to diagnose and manage patients. MAIN RESULTS: Fifteen studies (n = 31,496 patients) were included in this review. The average age of patients was 58 ± 15 years, and 47% were male. Virtual preoperative assessment resulted in similar surgery cancellation rates compared to in-person evaluation, with a pooled cancellation rate of 2% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1-3%). Most studies reported a positive patient experience, with a pooled estimate of 90% (95% CI, 81-95%). There was a high success rate in using the information collected with virtual care, in the range of 92-100%, to diagnose and manage patients resulting in time and cost savings in the range of 24-137 min and $60-67 per patient. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrates the utility of virtual care for preoperative assessment of surgical patients. Virtual preanesthesia evaluation had similar surgery cancellation rates, high patient satisfaction, and reduced costs compared to in-person evaluation.