Suppr超能文献

用于肺纤维化的门诊氧疗(OxyPuF):一项随机对照试验和可接受性研究。

Ambulatory Oxygen for Pulmonary Fibrosis (OxyPuF): a randomised controlled trial and acceptability study.

作者信息

Adams Rachel L, Maher Alisha, Gale Nicola, Crawshaw Anjali, Thickett David, Turner Alice M

机构信息

Health Services Management Centre, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.

Birmingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.

出版信息

Health Technol Assess. 2025 Jul 2:1-33. doi: 10.3310/TWKS4194.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis is a devastating condition of unknown cause that results in progressive, irreversible scarring of the lung, manifesting as breathlessness and dry cough. Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis is thought to be responsible for as many as 1 in 100 deaths in the United Kingdom, killing 5300 people a year. Ambulatory oxygen therapy is commonly used in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis to relieve exertional breathlessness, although evidence to support this strategy is lacking. This pragmatic randomised controlled trial was planned to test whether use of ambulatory oxygen therapy is beneficial in people with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis.

METHODS

We planned a randomised controlled trial in 260 patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis who are breathless on exertion and do not meet criteria for long-term oxygen therapy, randomising in a 1 : 1 ratio between ambulatory oxygen therapy and best supportive care. Primary outcome was a quality-of-life questionnaire validated in pulmonary fibrosis, the King's Brief Interstitial Lung Disease questionnaire, measured at 6 months. We calculated our sample size based on the minimum clinically important difference of four units and standard deviation equal to 8.85 in King's Brief Interstitial Lung Disease questionnaire; assuming power of 90% and 5% two-sided significance level, thus required 130 per arm, after accounting for 20% dropout. The trials unit's web-based randomisation algorithm minimises on factors potentially influencing response to ambulatory oxygen therapy, such as severity of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, desaturation to < 88% present on walking, current or recent (within 6 months) pulmonary rehabilitation, and recruitment centre. Secondary outcomes included symptoms, exercise capacity and cost-effectiveness. A process evaluation included assessment of trial fidelity and acceptability of the intervention with use of qualitative research methods and arts approaches with patients and staff. Qualitative interviews were conducted with patients from the Ambulatory Oxygen for Pulmonary Fibrosis trial and the idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis patient support group Action for Pulmonary Fibrosis, and stakeholders: healthcare professionals and policy-makers. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed clean verbatim. Photovoice methodology was conducted with patients. A workshop prior to data collection informed and guided data collection and analysis. Traditional qualitative analysis and arts-based coproduction analysis approaches were used to produce a short film. An economic model was planned but could not occur due to early termination.

RESULTS

The trial was stopped prematurely due to low recruitment. This was due to a combination of the impact of COVID-19 on research infrastructure, financial issues for sites with the payment structure for the trial and lack of equipoise which limited site recruitment. Seven out of 25 eligible, interested patients were randomised after pre-screening, implying a lack of interest among patients in the study. Baseline characteristics indicated that patients were elderly (mean age 81) and predominantly male. Qualitative work with 11 patients and 23 other stakeholders concluded that ambulatory oxygen therapy is desirable, acceptable and widely commissioned in the United Kingdom, such that further trials are not likely to be feasible.

CONCLUSION

Although we are not able to formally address our objectives of assessing efficacy and cost-effectiveness of ambulatory oxygen therapy in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, it is unlikely that conducting a randomised controlled trial is feasible due to lack of equipoise.

FUNDING

This synopsis presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme as award number NIHR131149.

摘要

引言

特发性肺纤维化是一种病因不明的严重疾病,会导致肺部进行性、不可逆的瘢痕形成,表现为呼吸急促和干咳。在英国,特发性肺纤维化被认为导致了每100例死亡中的1例,每年造成5300人死亡。门诊氧疗常用于特发性肺纤维化以缓解运动性呼吸急促,尽管缺乏支持这一策略的证据。这项实用的随机对照试验旨在测试门诊氧疗对特发性肺纤维化患者是否有益。

方法

我们计划对260例运动时呼吸急促且不符合长期氧疗标准的特发性肺纤维化患者进行随机对照试验,将其按1∶1的比例随机分为门诊氧疗组和最佳支持治疗组。主要结局是在6个月时使用在肺纤维化中验证的生活质量问卷——国王间质性肺病简易问卷进行测量。我们根据国王间质性肺病简易问卷中4个单位的最小临床重要差异和8.85的标准差计算样本量;假设检验效能为90%,双侧显著性水平为5%,因此每组需要130例,计入20%的失访率。试验单位基于网络的随机化算法将可能影响对门诊氧疗反应的因素降至最低,如特发性肺纤维化的严重程度、行走时血氧饱和度降至<88%、当前或近期(6个月内)的肺康复以及招募中心。次要结局包括症状、运动能力和成本效益。一项过程评估包括使用定性研究方法以及与患者和工作人员采用艺术方法来评估试验的保真度和干预措施的可接受性。对来自肺纤维化门诊氧疗试验和特发性肺纤维化患者支持组织“肺纤维化行动”的患者以及利益相关者(医疗保健专业人员和政策制定者)进行了定性访谈。访谈进行了录音,并逐字准确转录。对患者采用了照片声音法。在数据收集之前举办的一次研讨会为数据收集和分析提供了信息并进行了指导。采用传统的定性分析和基于艺术的合作生产分析方法制作了一部短片。计划了一个经济模型,但由于试验提前终止而未能实施。

结果

由于招募率低,试验提前终止。这是由于2019年冠状病毒病(COVID - 19)对研究基础设施的影响、试验支付结构给各研究点带来的财务问题以及缺乏均衡性(这限制了各研究点的招募)共同导致的。在预筛查后,25例符合条件且感兴趣的患者中有7例被随机分组,这表明患者对该研究缺乏兴趣。基线特征表明患者年龄较大(平均年龄81岁)且以男性为主。对11例患者和23名其他利益相关者开展的定性研究得出结论,门诊氧疗在英国是可取的、可接受的且被广泛委托实施,因此进一步开展试验不太可能可行。

结论

尽管我们无法正式实现评估门诊氧疗在特发性肺纤维化中的疗效和成本效益这一目标,但由于缺乏均衡性,开展一项随机对照试验不太可能可行。

资助

本摘要介绍了由英国国家卫生与保健研究所(NIHR)卫生技术评估项目资助的独立研究,资助编号为NIHR131149。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验