Comparison of portable oxygen concentrators in a simulated airplane environment
Rainald Fischer, Eva R Wanka, Franziska Einhaeupl, Klaus Voll, Helmut Schiffl, Susanne M Lang, Martin Gruss, Uta Ferrari, Rainald Fischer, Eva R Wanka, Franziska Einhaeupl, Klaus Voll, Helmut Schiffl, Susanne M Lang, Martin Gruss, Uta Ferrari
Abstract
Portable oxygen concentrators (POC) are highly desirable for patients with lung disease traveling by airplane, as these devices allow theoretically much higher travel times if additional batteries can be used. However, it is unclear whether POCs produce enough oxygen in airplanes at cruising altitude, even if complying with aviation regulations. We evaluated five frequently used POCs (XPO2 (Invacare, USA), Freestyle (AirSep C., USA), Evergo (Philipps Healthcare, Germany), Inogen One (Inogen, USA), Eclipse 3 (Sequal, USA)) at an altitude of 2650 m (as simulated airplane environment) in 11 patients with chronic obstructive lung disease (COPD) and compared theses POCs with the standard oxygen system (WS120, EMS Ltd., Germany) used by Lufthansa. Oxygen was delivered by each POC for 30 min to each patient at rest, blood gases were then drawn from the arterialized ear lobe. All POCs were able to deliver enough oxygen to increase the PaO(2) of our subjects by at least 1.40 kPa (10 mmHg). However, to achieve this increase, the two most lightweight POCs (Freestyle and Invacare XPO2) had to be run at their maximum level. This causes a significant reduction of battery life. The three other POCs (EverGo, Inogen One, Eclipse 3) and the WS120 were able to increase the PaO(2) by more than 2.55 kPa (20 mmHg), which provides extra safety for patients with more severe basal hypoxemia. When choosing the right oxygen system for air travel in patients in COPD, not only weight, but also battery life and maximum possible oxygen output must be considered carefully.
Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Source: PubMed