BACKGROUND: The German guideline on long-term oxygen therapy (LTOT) was published in 2008 by the German Respiratory Society (DGP), while the British Thoracic Society (BTS) published their most recent guideline in 2015. OBJECTIVES: The aim of the present article was to highlight the major areas of consensus and disagreement in the recently published BTS and DGP guidelines on LTOT. METHODS: The BTS and DGP guidelines were directly compared in terms of congruencies and differences. A critical appraisal was then performed and authors' suggestions were provided. RESULTS: The 2 guidelines are almost congruent in 2 major areas, namely, (1) the indication criteria for LTOT in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients at rest and (2) the recommended duration of LTOT over a 24-h period. However, 8 major areas in which the guidelines differ considerably were identified: (1) techniques for blood gas analysis; (2) timing of LTOT in stable patients; (3) LTOT in post-exacerbation COPD patients; (4) ambulatory oxygen therapy; (5) nocturnal oxygen therapy; (6) titration of oxygen flow rates; (7) follow-up visits; and (8) LTOT for patients who still smoke. Furthermore, the BTS guideline is much more detailed, includes more references (161 vs. 71) and is more up to date than the DGP guideline. CONCLUSION: There are major differences between the 2 guidelines. Many of the aspects raised by the BTS guideline appear to be reasonable with regard to the current literature, clinical experience and prescription practices. However, an international consensus on LTOT is lacking.
BACKGROUND: The German guideline on long-term oxygen therapy (LTOT) was published in 2008 by the German Respiratory Society (DGP), while the British Thoracic Society (BTS) published their most recent guideline in 2015. OBJECTIVES: The aim of the present article was to highlight the major areas of consensus and disagreement in the recently published BTS and DGP guidelines on LTOT. METHODS: The BTS and DGP guidelines were directly compared in terms of congruencies and differences. A critical appraisal was then performed and authors' suggestions were provided. RESULTS: The 2 guidelines are almost congruent in 2 major areas, namely, (1) the indication criteria for LTOT in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients at rest and (2) the recommended duration of LTOT over a 24-h period. However, 8 major areas in which the guidelines differ considerably were identified: (1) techniques for blood gas analysis; (2) timing of LTOT in stable patients; (3) LTOT in post-exacerbation COPDpatients; (4) ambulatory oxygen therapy; (5) nocturnal oxygen therapy; (6) titration of oxygen flow rates; (7) follow-up visits; and (8) LTOT for patients who still smoke. Furthermore, the BTS guideline is much more detailed, includes more references (161 vs. 71) and is more up to date than the DGP guideline. CONCLUSION: There are major differences between the 2 guidelines. Many of the aspects raised by the BTS guideline appear to be reasonable with regard to the current literature, clinical experience and prescription practices. However, an international consensus on LTOT is lacking.
Authors: Roy T M Sprooten; Kaatje Lenaerts; Dionne C W Braeken; Ilvy Grimbergen; Erica P Rutten; Emiel F M Wouters; Gernot G U Rohde Journal: Respiration Date: 2018-01-25 Impact factor: 3.580
Authors: Friederike Sophie Magnet; Daniel Sebastian Majorski; Jens Callegari; Sarah Bettina Schwarz; Claudia Schmoor; Wolfram Windisch; Jan Hendrik Storre Journal: Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis Date: 2017-09-06
Authors: Sarah Bettina Schwarz; Tim Mathes; Daniel Sebastian Majorski; Maximilian Wollsching-Strobel; Doreen Kroppen; Friederike Sophie Magnet; Wolfram Windisch Journal: BMC Pulm Med Date: 2021-08-03 Impact factor: 3.317