-
Respiratory Care Feb 2022Artificial airway suctioning is a key component of airway management and a core skill for clinicians charged with assuring airway patency. Suctioning of the artificial...
Artificial airway suctioning is a key component of airway management and a core skill for clinicians charged with assuring airway patency. Suctioning of the artificial airway is a common procedure performed worldwide on a daily basis. As such, it is imperative that clinicians are familiar with the most-effective and efficient methods to perform the procedure. We conducted a systematic review to assist in the development of evidence-based recommendations that pertain to the care of patients with artificial airways. From our systematic review, we developed guidelines and recommendations that addressed questions related to the indications, complications, timing, duration, and methods of artificial airway suctioning. By using a modified version of the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method, the following recommendations for suctioning were developed for neonatal, pediatric, and adult patients with an artificial airway: (1) breath sounds, visual secretions in the artificial airway, and a sawtooth pattern on the ventilator waveform are indicators for suctioning pediatric and adult patients, and an acute increase in airway resistance may be an indicator for suctioning in neonates; (2) as-needed only, rather than scheduled, suctioning is sufficient for neonatal and pediatric patients; (3) both closed and open suction systems may be used to safely and effectively remove secretions from the artificial airway of adult patients; (4) preoxygenation should be performed before suctioning in pediatric and adult patients; (5) the use of normal saline solution should generally be avoided during suctioning; (6) during open suctioning, sterile technique should be used; (7) suction catheters should occlude < 70% of the endotracheal tube lumen in neonates and < 50% in pediatric and adult patients, and suction pressure should be kept below -120 mm Hg in neonatal and pediatric patients and -200 mm Hg in adult patients; (8) suction should be applied for a maximum of 15 s per suctioning procedure; (9) deep suctioning should only be used when shallow suctioning is ineffective; (10) routine bronchoscopy for secretion removal is not recommended; and (11) devices used to clear endotracheal tubes may be used when airway resistance is increased due to secretion accumulation.
Topics: Adult; Airway Management; Child; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Intubation, Intratracheal; Respiration, Artificial; Suction; Ventilators, Mechanical
PubMed: 35078900
DOI: 10.4187/respcare.09548 -
Cureus Nov 2023Nasal congestion is a common issue stemming from various factors such as allergies and anatomical variations. Allergic rhinitis frequently leads to nasal congestion. The... (Review)
Review
Nasal congestion is a common issue stemming from various factors such as allergies and anatomical variations. Allergic rhinitis frequently leads to nasal congestion. The pathophysiology involves inflammation, swelling, and mucus production in the nasal mucosa. Multiple treatments are available, including oral phenylephrine, an over-the-counter or prescription option. However, the effectiveness and safety of phenylephrine have been subjects of debate. This systematic review aims to provide an updated perspective on the efficacy of oral phenylephrine versus placebo in addressing nasal congestion in adults. We conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines, a systematic review involving searches on PubMed, Cochrane, and Scopus databases. Inclusion/exclusion criteria were defined to identify high-quality studies. The focus was on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and case-control studies published in English between 1998 and 2023, involving adult populations. The interventions compared oral phenylephrine with placebo or standard care, with outcomes centering on changes in nasal congestion symptoms and nasal airway resistance. We identified four articles that met the criteria. These studies exhibited varied designs and populations. The findings consistently indicated that phenylephrine was not more effective than a placebo in relieving nasal congestion. This systematic review demonstrates that oral phenylephrine did not offer substantial relief from nasal congestion compared to a placebo in adults. The studies featured diverse designs, yet the prevailing conclusion was that phenylephrine's efficacy was limited. Safety assessments showed no life-threatening adverse events, with common side effects including headaches and mild discomfort. In summary, this systematic review indicates that oral phenylephrine is not significantly more effective than a placebo in alleviating nasal congestion in adults. Clinicians should explore alternative treatment options, considering the review's limitations. Additional research may be needed to clarify the role of oral phenylephrine in managing nasal congestion.
PubMed: 38125218
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.49074 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jun 2022Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a significant cause of hospitalisation and death in young children. Positioning and mechanical ventilation have been... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a significant cause of hospitalisation and death in young children. Positioning and mechanical ventilation have been regularly used to reduce respiratory distress and improve oxygenation in hospitalised patients. Due to the association of prone positioning (lying on the abdomen) with sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) within the first six months, it is recommended that young infants be placed on their back (supine). However, prone positioning may be a non-invasive way of increasing oxygenation in individuals with acute respiratory distress, and offers a more significant survival advantage in those who are mechanically ventilated. There are substantial differences in respiratory mechanics between adults and infants. While the respiratory tract undergoes significant development within the first two years of life, differences in airway physiology between adults and children become less prominent by six to eight years old. However, there is a reduced risk of SIDS during artificial ventilation in hospitalised infants. Thus, an updated review focusing on positioning for infants and young children with ARDS is warranted. This is an update of a review published in 2005, 2009, and 2012.
OBJECTIVES
To compare the effects of different body positions in hospitalised infants and children with acute respiratory distress syndrome aged between four weeks and 16 years.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, which contains the Acute Respiratory Infections Group's Specialised Register, MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL from January 2004 to July 2021.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs comparing two or more positions for the management of infants and children hospitalised with ARDS.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently extracted data from each study. We resolved differences by consensus, or referred to a third contributor to arbitrate. We analysed bivariate outcomes using an odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). We analysed continuous outcomes using a mean difference (MD) and 95% CI. We used a fixed-effect model, unless heterogeneity was significant (I statistic > 50%), when we used a random-effects model.
MAIN RESULTS
We included six trials: four cross-over trials, and two parallel randomised trials, with 198 participants aged between 4 weeks and 16 years, all but 15 of whom were mechanically ventilated. Four trials compared prone to supine positions. One trial compared the prone position to good-lung dependent (where the person lies on the side of the healthy lung, e.g. if the right lung was healthy, they were made to lie on the right side), and independent (or non-good-lung independent, where the person lies on the opposite side to the healthy lung, e.g. if the right lung was healthy, they were made to lie on the left side) position. One trial compared good-lung independent to good-lung dependent positions. When the prone (with ventilators) and supine positions were compared, there was no information on episodes of apnoea or mortality due to respiratory events. There was no conclusive result in oxygen saturation (SaO MD 0.40 mmHg, 95% CI -1.22 to 2.66; 1 trial, 30 participants; very low certainty evidence); blood gases, PCO (MD 3.0 mmHg, 95% CI -1.93 to 7.93; 1 trial, 99 participants; low certainty evidence), or PO (MD 2 mmHg, 95% CI -5.29 to 9.29; 1 trial, 99 participants; low certainty evidence); or lung function (PaO/FiO ratio; MD 28.16 mmHg, 95% CI -9.92 to 66.24; 2 trials, 121 participants; very low certainty evidence). However, there was an improvement in oxygenation index (FiO% X M/ PaO) with prone positioning in both the parallel trials (MD -2.42, 95% CI -3.60 to -1.25; 2 trials, 121 participants; very low certainty evidence), and the cross-over study (MD -8.13, 95% CI -15.01 to -1.25; 1 study, 20 participants). Derived indices of respiratory mechanics, such as tidal volume, respiratory rate, and positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) were reported. There was an apparent decrease in tidal volume between prone and supine groups in a parallel study (MD -0.60, 95% CI -1.05 to -0.15; 1 study, 84 participants; very low certainty evidence). When prone and supine positions were compared in a cross-over study, there were no conclusive results in respiratory compliance (MD 0.07, 95% CI -0.10 to 0.24; 1 study, 10 participants); changes in PEEP (MD -0.70 cm HO, 95% CI -2.72 to 1.32; 1 study, 10 participants); or resistance (MD -0.00, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.04; 1 study, 10 participants). One study reported adverse events. There were no conclusive results for potential harm between groups in extubation (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.13 to 2.54; 1 trial, 102 participants; very low certainty evidence); obstructions of the endotracheal tube (OR 5.20, 95% CI 0.24 to 111.09; 1 trial, 102 participants; very low certainty evidence); pressure ulcers (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.41 to 2.44; 1 trial, 102 participants; very low certainty evidence); and hypercapnia (high levels of arterial carbon dioxide; OR 3.06, 95% CI 0.12 to 76.88; 1 trial, 102 participants; very low certainty evidence). One study (50 participants) compared supine positions to good-lung dependent and independent positions. There was no conclusive evidence that PaO was different between supine and good-lung dependent positioning (MD 3.44 mm Hg, 95% CI -23.12 to 30.00; 1 trial, 25 participants; very low certainty evidence). There was also no conclusive evidence for supine position and good-lung independent positioning (MD -2.78 mmHg, 95% CI -28.84, 23.28; 25 participants; very low certainty evidence); or between good-lung dependent and independent positioning (MD 6.22, 95% CI -21.25 to 33.69; 1 trial, 25 participants; very low certainty evidence). As most trials did not describe how possible biases were addressed, the potential for bias in these findings is unclear.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Although included studies suggest that prone positioning may offer some advantage, there was little evidence to make definitive recommendations. There appears to be low certainty evidence that positioning improves oxygenation in mechanically ventilated children with ARDS. Due to the increased risk of SIDS with prone positioning and lung injury with artificial ventilation, it is recommended that hospitalised infants and children should only be placed in this position while under continuous cardiorespiratory monitoring.
Topics: Adult; Child; Child, Preschool; Humans; Infant; Infant, Newborn; Patient Positioning; Positive-Pressure Respiration; Respiration, Artificial; Respiratory Distress Syndrome; Sudden Infant Death
PubMed: 35661343
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003645.pub4 -
Cureus Jul 2023Airway suctioning is routinely performed in the majority of care circumstances, including acute care, subacute care, home-based settings, and long-term care. Using an... (Review)
Review
Airway suctioning is routinely performed in the majority of care circumstances, including acute care, subacute care, home-based settings, and long-term care. Using an artificial airway to suction the patient allows for the mobilization and evacuation of secretions. When a patient can't independently remove all of the secretions from their respiratory tract, suction is used. This can occur when the body produces excessive secretion or it is not eliminated quickly enough, causing the respiratory system's upper and lower respiratory secretions to accumulate. Airway blockage and inadequate breathing may result from this. Ultimately, this leads to a shortage of oxygen and carbon dioxide from the air, both of which are necessary for ideal cellular activity. Artificial airway suctioning is one of the most crucial components of airway care and a core competency for medical professionals trying to ensure airway patency. Artificial airway suctioning is a standard treatment carried out every day globally and is frequently done in both outpatient and inpatient patients. Therefore, specialists must know the safest and most efficient ways to perform surgery and any potential side effects. In ventilated infants and children, the removal of obstructive secretions by endotracheal suctioning is frequently done. It is unknown how suctioning affects the mechanics of breathing. This study used a prospective observational clinical design to examine the immediate impact of airway resistance in endotracheal suctioning, tidal volume, and dynamic lung regulation in mechanically ventilated adult patients and mechanically ventilated pediatric patients. The preparation, process, and indications for intraoperative fusion treatment in various circumstances are covered in this systematic review.
PubMed: 37641766
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.42579 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Aug 2021Croup is an acute viral respiratory infection with upper airway mucosal inflammation that may cause respiratory distress. Most cases are mild. Moderate to severe croup... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Croup is an acute viral respiratory infection with upper airway mucosal inflammation that may cause respiratory distress. Most cases are mild. Moderate to severe croup may require treatment with corticosteroids (the benefits of which are often delayed) and nebulised epinephrine (adrenaline) (the benefits of which may be short-lived and which can cause dose-related adverse effects including tachycardia, arrhythmias, and hypertension). Rarely, croup results in respiratory failure necessitating emergency intubation and ventilation. A mixture of helium and oxygen (heliox) may prevent morbidity and mortality in ventilated neonates by reducing the viscosity of the inhaled air. It is currently used during emergency transport of children with severe croup. Anecdotal evidence suggests that it relieves respiratory distress. This review updates versions published in 2010, 2013, and 2018.
OBJECTIVES
To examine the effect of heliox compared to oxygen or other active interventions, placebo, or no treatment on relieving signs and symptoms in children with croup as determined by a croup score and rates of admission and intubation.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, which includes the Cochrane Acute Respiratory Infections Group Specialised Register, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, and LILACS, on 15 April 2021. We also searched the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (apps.who.int/trialsearch/) and ClinicalTrials.gov (clinicaltrials.gov) on 15 April 2021. We contacted the British Oxygen Company, a leading supplier of heliox.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing the effect of heliox in comparison with placebo, no treatment, or any active intervention(s) in children with croup.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Data that could not be pooled for statistical analysis were reported descriptively.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 3 RCTs involving a total of 91 children aged between 6 months and 4 years. Study duration was from 7 to 16 months, and all studies were conducted in emergency departments. Two studies were conducted in the USA and one in Spain. Heliox was administered as a mixture of 70% heliox and 30% oxygen. Risk of bias was low in two studies and high in one study because of its open-label design. We did not identify any new trials for this 2021 update. One study of 15 children with mild croup compared heliox with 30% humidified oxygen administered for 20 minutes. There may be no difference in croup score changes between groups at 20 minutes (mean difference (MD) -0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) -2.36 to 0.70) (Westley croup score, scale range 0 to 16). The mean croup score at 20 minutes postintervention may not differ between groups (MD -0.57, 95% CI -1.46 to 0.32). There may be no difference between groups in mean respiratory rate (MD 6.40, 95% CI -1.38 to 14.18) and mean heart rate (MD 14.50, 95% CI -8.49 to 37.49) at 20 minutes. The evidence for all outcomes in this comparison was of low certainty, downgraded for serious imprecision. All children were discharged, but information on hospitalisation, intubation, or re-presenting to emergency departments was not reported. In another study, 47 children with moderate croup received one dose of oral dexamethasone (0.3 mg/kg) with either heliox for 60 minutes or no treatment. Heliox may slightly improve Taussig croup scores (scale range 0 to 15) at 60 minutes postintervention (MD -1.10, 95% CI -1.96 to -0.24), but there may be no difference between groups at 120 minutes (MD -0.70, 95% CI -1.56 to 0.16). Children treated with heliox may have lower mean Taussig croup scores at 60 minutes (MD -1.11, 95% CI -2.05 to -0.17) but not at 120 minutes (MD -0.71, 95% CI -1.72 to 0.30). Children treated with heliox may have lower mean respiratory rates at 60 minutes (MD -4.94, 95% CI -9.66 to -0.22), but there may be no difference at 120 minutes (MD -3.17, 95% CI -7.83 to 1.49). There may be a difference in hospitalisation rates between groups (odds ratio 0.46, 95% CI 0.04 to 5.41). We assessed the evidence for all outcomes in this comparison as of low certainty, downgraded due to imprecision and high risk of bias related to an open-label design. Information on heart rate and intubation was not reported. In the third study, 29 children with moderate to severe croup all received continuous cool mist and intramuscular dexamethasone (0.6 mg/kg). They were then randomised to receive either heliox (given as a mixture of 70% helium and 30% oxygen) plus one to two doses of nebulised saline or 100% oxygen plus nebulised epinephrine (adrenaline), with gas therapy administered continuously for three hours. Heliox may slightly improve croup scores at 90 minutes postintervention, but may result in little or no difference overall using repeated-measures analysis. We assessed the evidence for all outcomes in this comparison as of low certainty, downgraded due to high risk of bias related to inadequate reporting. Information on hospitalisation or re-presenting to the emergency department was not reported. The included studies did not report on adverse events, intensive care admissions, or parental anxiety. We could not pool the available data because each comparison included data from only one study.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Given the very limited available evidence, uncertainty remains regarding the effectiveness and safety of heliox. Heliox may not be more effective than 30% humidified oxygen for children with mild croup, but may be beneficial in the short term for children with moderate croup treated with dexamethasone. The effect of heliox may be similar to 100% oxygen given with one or two doses of adrenaline. Adverse events were not reported, and it is unclear if these were monitored in the included studies. Adequately powered RCTs comparing heliox with standard treatments are needed to further assess the role of heliox in the treatment of children with moderate to severe croup.
Topics: Airway Obstruction; Airway Resistance; Child; Child, Preschool; Croup; Helium; Humans; Infant; Oxygen; Oxygen Inhalation Therapy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 34397099
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006822.pub6 -
Sleep & Breathing = Schlaf & Atmung Jun 2024Recent studies have highlighted the potential role of a short lingual frenulum as a risk factor for pediatric obstructive sleep apnea syndrome. A shortened frenulum may... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
Recent studies have highlighted the potential role of a short lingual frenulum as a risk factor for pediatric obstructive sleep apnea syndrome. A shortened frenulum may contribute to abnormal orofacial development, leading to increased upper airway resistance and susceptibility to upper airway collapsibility during sleep. Recognizing early indicators, such as a short lingual frenulum, is crucial for prompt intervention. This systematic review aims to evaluate the association between a short lingual frenulum and the risk of obstructive sleep apnea syndrome in children.
METHODS
This systematic review adheres to PRISMA criteria for a quantitative analysis. A comprehensive search was conducted on five databases until January 2024 to identify relevant studies. The selected articles underwent rigorous analysis, considering study design, sample characteristics, lingual frenulum characterization, sleep assessment methods, and key findings.
RESULTS
A total of 239 references were initially identified. Finally, six studies were included in the qualitative synthesis, with four studies eligible for the quantitative synthesis. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was employed to assess study quality. Meta-analysis, supported by a moderate evidence profile according to the GRADE scale, revealed statistically significant differences, with odds ratios of 3.051 (confidence interval: 1.939 to 4.801) for a short frenulum and 12.304 (confidence interval: 6.141 to 24.653) for a high-arched palate.
CONCLUSION
This systematic review and meta-analysis provide evidence supporting the association between ankyloglossia and obstructive sleep apnea in children. Nevertheless, it is crucial to consider additional factors such as tongue mobility and the presence of a high-arched palate in further evaluations.
Topics: Child; Humans; Ankyloglossia; Sleep Apnea, Obstructive
PubMed: 38478208
DOI: 10.1007/s11325-024-03021-4 -
NPJ Primary Care Respiratory Medicine Oct 2022Given the increasing use of e-cigarettes and uncertainty surrounding their safety, we conducted a systematic review to determine the effects of e-cigarettes on measures...
Given the increasing use of e-cigarettes and uncertainty surrounding their safety, we conducted a systematic review to determine the effects of e-cigarettes on measures of lung function. We systematically searched EMBASE, MEDLINE, and PsycINFO databases via Ovid, the Cochrane CENTRAL database, and the Web of Science Core from 2004 until July 2021, identifying 8856 potentially eligible studies. A total of eight studies (seven studying immediate effects and one long-term effects, 273 total participants) were included. The risk of bias was assessed using the Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies-of Interventions (ROBINS-I) and Cochrane risk of bias tools. These studies suggest that vaping increases airway resistance but does not appear to impact forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV, forced vital capacity (FVC), or FEV/FVC ratio. However, given the limited size and follow-up duration of these studies, larger, long-term studies are required to further determine the effects of e-cigarettes on lung function.
Topics: Humans; Vaping; Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems; Forced Expiratory Volume; Vital Capacity; Lung
PubMed: 36273009
DOI: 10.1038/s41533-022-00311-w -
Effects of Exercise on Patients with Obstructive Sleep Apnea: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.International Journal of Environmental... Aug 2022With exercise being more frequently utilized in treatment for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), a systematic review of the intervention efficacy of exercise on OSA is... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
With exercise being more frequently utilized in treatment for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), a systematic review of the intervention efficacy of exercise on OSA is necessary. PubMed, EBSCO, Web of Science, VIP, and CNKI databases were searched to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of exercise applied to OSA from January 2000 to January 2022. The literature screening, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment of included studies were conducted independently by two reviewers. Meta-analysis was then performed using Rev Man 5.4 software. A total of 9 RCTs were included, including 444 patients. Compared with the control group, exercise made an improvement in apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) [MD = -6.65, 95% CI (-7.77, -5.53), < 0.00001], minimum oxygen saturation (SaO%) [MD = 1.67, 95% CI (0.82, 2.52), = 0.0001], peak oxygen uptake (VO) [SMD = 0.54, 95% CI (0.31, 0.78), < 0.00001], Pittsburgh sleep quality index (PSQI) [MD = -2.08, 95% CI (-3.95, -0.21), = 0.03], and Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) values [MD = -1.64, 95% CI, (-3.07, -0.22), = 0.02]. However, there were no significant changes in body mass index (BMI). As for the results of subgroup analysis, aerobic exercise combined with resistance exercise [MD = -7.36, 95% CI (-8.64, -6.08), < 0.00001] had a better effect on AHI reduction than aerobic exercise alone [MD = -4.36, 95% CI (-6.67, -2.06), = 0.0002]. This systematic review demonstrates that exercise reduces the severity of OSA with no changes in BMI, and the effect of aerobic exercise combined with resistance training is better than aerobic exercise alone in AHI reduction. Exercise also improves cardiopulmonary fitness, sleep quality, and excessive daytime sleepiness.
Topics: Body Mass Index; Continuous Positive Airway Pressure; Disorders of Excessive Somnolence; Exercise; Humans; Sleep Apnea, Obstructive
PubMed: 36078558
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph191710845 -
Sleep Science (Sao Paulo, Brazil) 2022Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) is the standard treatment for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), but its outcomes for the pregnant are still undefined. This study... (Review)
Review
Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) is the standard treatment for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), but its outcomes for the pregnant are still undefined. This study aims to review current CPAP intervention during pregnancy, discuss published trials, and propose relevant issues that have yet to be addressed satisfactorily about the cardiovascular, metabolic, fetal, and neonatal effects of CPAP treatment during gestation. Two authors independently conducted a systematic review until March 28th, 2021 on PubMed, BVS, and Cochrane Library, using PRISMA guidelines, and risk of bias. Discrepancies were reconciled by a third reviewer. Of 59 identified citations, eight original trials have submitted a total of 90 pregnant women to polysomnography and CPAP therapy. Four studies performed in samples with hypertension or preeclampsia presented blood pressure decrease or maintained the antihypertensive drug dose in the CPAP group. After CPAP utilization, one trial registered cardiac output and stroke volume increase with heart rate and peripheral vascular resistance decrease, which were correlated with birth weight increment. Others documented a higher Apgar in the CPAP group and more fetal movements during CPAP use. There was a reduction in serum uric acid and tumor necrosis factor-alpha in the CPAP groups whose blood pressure decreased. However, two weeks of CPAP use in women with gestational diabetes and OSA did not improve glucose levels but raised the insulin secretion in those adherents to CPAP. Despite these positive results without adverse effects, randomized controlled trials with standardized follow-up in larger populations are required to determine CPAP therapy recommendations in pregnancy.
PubMed: 35273777
DOI: 10.5935/1984-0063.20210024 -
Sports Medicine - Open Dec 2021Protection against airborne infection is currently, due to the COVID-19-associated restrictions, ubiquitously applied during public transport use, work and leisure time....
The Impact of Ubiquitous Face Masks and Filtering Face Piece Application During Rest, Work and Exercise on Gas Exchange, Pulmonary Function and Physical Performance: A Systematic Review with Meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Protection against airborne infection is currently, due to the COVID-19-associated restrictions, ubiquitously applied during public transport use, work and leisure time. Increased carbon dioxide re-inhalation and breathing resistance may result thereof and, in turn, may negatively impact metabolism and performance.
OBJECTIVES
To deduce the impact of the surgical mask and filtering face piece type 2 (FFP2) or N95 respirator application on gas exchange (pulse-derived oxygen saturation (SpO), carbon dioxide partial pressure (PCO), carbon dioxide exhalation (VCO) and oxygen uptake (VO)), pulmonary function (respiratory rate and ventilation) and physical performance (heart rate HR, peak power output W).
METHODS
Systematic review with meta-analysis. Literature available in Medline/Pubmed, the Cochrane Library and the Web of Knowledge with the last search on the 6 of May 2021. Eligibility criteria: Randomised controlled parallel group or crossover trials (RCT), full-text availability, comparison of the acute effects of ≥ 1 intervention (surgical mask or FFP2/N95 application) to a control/comparator condition (i.e. no mask wearing). Participants were required to be healthy humans and > 16 years of age without conditions or illnesses influencing pulmonary function or metabolism. Risk of bias was rated using the crossover extension of the Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool II. Standardised mean differences (SMD, Hedges' g) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated, overall and for subgroups based on mask and exercise type, as pooled effect size estimators in our random-effects meta-analysis.
RESULTS
Of the 1499 records retrieved, 14 RCTs (all crossover trials, high risk of bias) with 25 independent intervention arms (effect sizes per outcome) on 246 participants were included. Masks led to a decrease in SpO during vigorous intensity exercise (6 effect sizes; SMD = - 0.40 [95% CI: - 0.70, - 0.09], mostly attributed to FFP2/N95) and to a SpO-increase during rest (5 effect sizes; SMD = 0.34 [95% CI: 0.04, 0.64]); no general effect of mask wearing on SpO occurred (21 effect sizes, SMD = 0.34 [95% CI: 0.04, 0.64]). Wearing a mask led to a general oxygen uptake decrease (5 effect sizes, SMD = - 0.44 [95% CI: - 0.75, - 0.14]), to slower respiratory rates (15 effect sizes, SMD = - 0.25 [95% CI: - 0.44, - 0.06]) and to a decreased ventilation (11 effect sizes, SMD = - 0.43 [95% CI: - 0.74, - 0.12]). Heart rate (25 effect sizes; SMD = 0.05 [95% CI: - 0.09, 0.19]), W (9 effect sizes; SMD = - 0.12 [95% CI: - 0.39, 0.15]), PCO (11 effect sizes; SMD = 0.07 [95% CI: - 0.14, 0.29]) and VCO (4 effect sizes, SMD = - 0.30 [95% CI: - 0.71, 0.10]) were not different to the control, either in total or dependent on mask type or physical activity status.
CONCLUSION
The number of crossover-RCT studies was low and the designs displayed a high risk of bias. The within-mask- and -intensity-homogeneous effects on gas exchange kinetics indicated larger detrimental effects during exhausting physical activities. Pulse-derived oxygen saturation was increased during rest when a mask was applied, whereas wearing a mask during exhausting exercise led to decreased oxygen saturation. Breathing frequency and ventilation adaptations were not related to exercise intensity. FFP2/N95 and, to a lesser extent, surgical mask application negatively impacted the capacity for gas exchange and pulmonary function but not the peak physical performance. Registration: Prospero registration number: CRD42021244634.
PubMed: 34897560
DOI: 10.1186/s40798-021-00388-6