Supplemental Oxygen during Air Travel in Sickle Cell Disease -Common Clinical Practices
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Introduction: Air travel may expose patients with sickle cell disease (SCD) to an increased risk of disease related complications. Several factors are felt to contribute, including prolonged hypoxia, dehydration, temperature changes and stress. The Canadian Pediatric Society position statement recommends that SCD patients use supplemental oxygen on flights. While other notable guidelines including the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute (NHLBI), the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI), the Canadian Haemoglobinopathy Association (CanHaem) and the British Thoracic Society do not make specific recommendations. Since available guidelines and evidence lack consensus, it is unclear what recommendations healthcare practitioners (HCPs) should counsel to their SCD patients. Objectives: 1. Determine the recommendations North American hematology HCPs make to SCD patients regarding air travel. 2. Determine the proportion of HCPs recommending supplemental oxygen to SCD patients. 3. Among HCPs that recommend supplemental oxygen, determine which patient factors influence their decision. 4. Evaluate patient experiences regarding supplemental oxygen recommendations prior to air travel. Methods: First, a literature review using PubMed, TRIP database, Medline (Ovid) search engines was completed. Two investigators independently reviewed abstracts and references. Second, a cross-sectional online survey was circulated through CanHaem (186 members) and the American Society of Pediatric Hematology/ Oncology (ASPHO, 1991 members) listservs. North American hematology HCPs were asked to share their air travel recommendations. The survey was peer-reviewed by 7 practitioners prior to distribution for content and face validity. Similarly, a patient survey regarding experiences with air travel was distributed through the Sickle Cell Disease Association of Canada (SCDAC) listserv. University of Alberta ethics research board approved. Results: A review of the literature is summarized in Table 1. A total of 81 surveys were returned with 79 evaluable for analysis. Demographic data reveals that most survey respondents are physicians (90%), pediatric providers (77%), and practice at an altitude 6 hours, 31% for flights >10 hours and the remainder for all flight lengths. In a small sample of patients (n=5) the majority have experienced a sickle cell crisis during or shortly after air travel. Only one patient participant has used oxygen in the past. Conclusion: Most HCPs surveyed do not routinely recommend supplemental oxygen to their SCD patients as a prophylactic measure. Among HCPs that recommend oxygen both patient and flight factors influence their recommendations. Although oxygen is not a routine recommendation, most indicate that air travel is a likely risk factor for VOC. In fact, there are numerous published cases of air travel related complications, most commonly splenic complications and VOC, in the SCD population (Table 1). There is a lack of consensus among North American HCPs regarding supplemental oxygen recommendations. Further investigation is needed to delineate the need for supplemental oxygen to prevent complications during air travel for SCD patients. Download : Download high-res image (434KB) Download : Download full-size image Disclosures Bruce: Bristol-Meyers-Squibb - consultant 2016-2017: Consultancy; ovartis consult and ad board 2015-2016: Consultancy; Apopharma 2015: Consultancy.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,008 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».