OBJECTIVE: Evaluation and comparison of the therapeutic efficacy of a portable hyperbaric chamber and dexamethasone in the treatment of acute mountain sickness. DESIGN: Randomised trial during the summer mountaineering season. SETTING: High altitude research laboratory in the Capanna Regina Margherita at 4559m above sea level (Alps Valais). SUBJECTS:31 climbers with symptoms of acute mountain sickness randomly assigned to different treatments. INTERVENTIONS: One hour of treatment in the hyperbaric chamber at a pressure of 193 mbar or oral administration of 8 mg dexamethasone initially, followed by 4 mg after 6 hours. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Symptoms of acute mountain sickness (Lake Louise score, clinical score, and AMS-C score) before one and about 11 hours after beginning the different methods of treatment. Permitted intake of mild analgesics before treatment and in the follow up period. RESULTS: After one hour of treatment compression with 193 mbar caused a significantly greater relief of symptoms of acute mountain sickness than dexamethasone (Lake Louise score: mean (SD) -4.6 (1.9) v -2.5 (1.8); clinical score: -4.0 (1.2) v -1.5 (1.4); AMS-C score: -1.24 (0.51) v -0.54 (0.59)). In contrast after about 11 hours subjects treated with dexamethasone suffered from significantly less severe acute mountain sickness than subjects treated with the hyperbaric chamber (-7.0 (3.6) v -1.6 (3.0); -4.1 (1.9) v -1.0 (1.5); -1.78 (0.73) v -0.75 (0.82) respectively). Intake of analgesics was similar in both groups. CONCLUSION: Both methods were efficient in treatment of acute mountain sickness. One hour of compression with 193 mbar in the hyperbaric chamber, corresponding to a descent of 2250 m, led to short term improvement but had no long term beneficial effect. On the other hand, treatment with dexamethasone in an oral dose of 8 mg initially followed by 4 mg every 6 hours resulted in a longer term clinical improvement. For optimal efficacy the two methods should be combined if descent or evacuation is not possible.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: Evaluation and comparison of the therapeutic efficacy of a portable hyperbaric chamber and dexamethasone in the treatment of acute mountain sickness. DESIGN: Randomised trial during the summer mountaineering season. SETTING: High altitude research laboratory in the Capanna Regina Margherita at 4559m above sea level (Alps Valais). SUBJECTS: 31 climbers with symptoms of acute mountain sickness randomly assigned to different treatments. INTERVENTIONS: One hour of treatment in the hyperbaric chamber at a pressure of 193 mbar or oral administration of 8 mg dexamethasone initially, followed by 4 mg after 6 hours. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Symptoms of acute mountain sickness (Lake Louise score, clinical score, and AMS-C score) before one and about 11 hours after beginning the different methods of treatment. Permitted intake of mild analgesics before treatment and in the follow up period. RESULTS: After one hour of treatment compression with 193 mbar caused a significantly greater relief of symptoms of acute mountain sickness than dexamethasone (Lake Louise score: mean (SD) -4.6 (1.9) v -2.5 (1.8); clinical score: -4.0 (1.2) v -1.5 (1.4); AMS-C score: -1.24 (0.51) v -0.54 (0.59)). In contrast after about 11 hours subjects treated with dexamethasone suffered from significantly less severe acute mountain sickness than subjects treated with the hyperbaric chamber (-7.0 (3.6) v -1.6 (3.0); -4.1 (1.9) v -1.0 (1.5); -1.78 (0.73) v -0.75 (0.82) respectively). Intake of analgesics was similar in both groups. CONCLUSION: Both methods were efficient in treatment of acute mountain sickness. One hour of compression with 193 mbar in the hyperbaric chamber, corresponding to a descent of 2250 m, led to short term improvement but had no long term beneficial effect. On the other hand, treatment with dexamethasone in an oral dose of 8 mg initially followed by 4 mg every 6 hours resulted in a longer term clinical improvement. For optimal efficacy the two methods should be combined if descent or evacuation is not possible.
Authors: Gabriel Willmann; M Dominik Fischer; Andreas Schatz; Kai Schommer; Andre Messias; Eberhart Zrenner; Karl U Bartz-Schmidt; Florian Gekeler Journal: PLoS One Date: 2011-11-01 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: M Dominik Fischer; Gabriel Willmann; Andreas Schatz; Kai Schommer; Ahmad Zhour; Eberhart Zrenner; Karl U Bartz-Schmidt; Florian Gekeler Journal: PLoS One Date: 2012-04-30 Impact factor: 3.240