Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • ERJ Early View
  • Past issues
  • Authors/reviewers
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Open access
    • COVID-19 submission information
    • Peer reviewer login
  • Alerts
  • Podcasts
  • Subscriptions
  • ERS Publications
    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS Books
    • ERS publications home

User menu

  • Log in
  • Subscribe
  • Contact Us
  • My Cart
  • Log out

Search

  • Advanced search
  • ERS Publications
    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS Books
    • ERS publications home

Login

European Respiratory Society

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • ERJ Early View
  • Past issues
  • Authors/reviewers
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Open access
    • COVID-19 submission information
    • Peer reviewer login
  • Alerts
  • Podcasts
  • Subscriptions

Domiciliary liquid oxygen versus concentrator treatment in chronic hypoxaemia: a cost-utility analysis

A Andersson, K Strom, H Brodin, M Alton, G Boman, P Jakobsson, A Lindberg, M Uddenfeldt, H Walter, LA Levin
European Respiratory Journal 1998 12: 1284-1289; DOI:
A Andersson
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
K Strom
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
H Brodin
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
M Alton
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
G Boman
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
P Jakobsson
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
A Lindberg
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
M Uddenfeldt
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
H Walter
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
LA Levin
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Whether long-term oxygen therapy (LTOT) improves quality of life in chronic hypoxaemia has been questioned. LTOT with an oxygen concentrator (C/C) and gas cylinders for ambulation is considered cumbersome compared to mobile liquid oxygen equipment (L). The hypothesis for this study was that LTOT with liquid oxygen treatment (L) improves patients' health-related quality of life, but that it is also more expensive compared to concentrator (C/C) treatment. A prospective, randomized multicentre trial comparing C/C with L for LTOT was conducted during a six-month period. Fifty-one patients (29 on L and 22 on C/C) with chronic hypoxaemia, regularly active outside the home, participated in the study initially. Costs for oxygen were obtained from the pharmacies. Patient diaries and telephone contacts with members of the healthcare sector were used to estimate costs. Health-related quality of life was measured by the Sickness Impact Profile (SIP) and the EuroQol, instruments at the start and after 6 months. The average total cost per patient for group C/C for the six-month period was US$1,310, and for group L it was US$4,950. Health-related quality of life measured by the SIP instrument showed significant differences in favour of group L in the categories/dimensions of physical function, body care, ambulation, social interaction and total SIP score. In conclusion, liquid-oxygen treatment was more expensive compared to concentrator treatment. However, treatment effects showed that liquid oxygen had a better impact on quality of life.

PreviousNext
Back to top
Vol 12 Issue 6 Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on European Respiratory Society .

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Domiciliary liquid oxygen versus concentrator treatment in chronic hypoxaemia: a cost-utility analysis
(Your Name) has sent you a message from European Respiratory Society
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the European Respiratory Society web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Domiciliary liquid oxygen versus concentrator treatment in chronic hypoxaemia: a cost-utility analysis
A Andersson, K Strom, H Brodin, M Alton, G Boman, P Jakobsson, A Lindberg, M Uddenfeldt, H Walter, LA Levin
European Respiratory Journal Dec 1998, 12 (6) 1284-1289;

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Share
Domiciliary liquid oxygen versus concentrator treatment in chronic hypoxaemia: a cost-utility analysis
A Andersson, K Strom, H Brodin, M Alton, G Boman, P Jakobsson, A Lindberg, M Uddenfeldt, H Walter, LA Levin
European Respiratory Journal Dec 1998, 12 (6) 1284-1289;
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Technorati logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Connotea logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
Full Text (PDF)

Jump To

  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

More in this TOC Section

  • Inhaled isotonic alkaline versus saline solution and radioaerosol clearance in chronic cough
  • Lung volume reduction surgery versus conservative treatment in severe emphysema
  • Effect of moderate alcohol upon obstructive sleep apnoea
Show more Clinical Trial

Related Articles

Navigate

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • Archive

About the ERJ

  • Journal information
  • Editorial board
  • Reviewers
  • Press
  • Permissions and reprints
  • Advertising

The European Respiratory Society

  • Society home
  • myERS
  • Privacy policy
  • Accessibility

ERS publications

  • European Respiratory Journal
  • ERJ Open Research
  • European Respiratory Review
  • Breathe
  • ERS books online
  • ERS Bookshop

Help

  • Feedback

For authors

  • Instructions for authors
  • Publication ethics and malpractice
  • Submit a manuscript

For readers

  • Alerts
  • Subjects
  • Podcasts
  • RSS

Subscriptions

  • Accessing the ERS publications

Contact us

European Respiratory Society
442 Glossop Road
Sheffield S10 2PX
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 114 2672860
Email: journals@ersnet.org

ISSN

Print ISSN:  0903-1936
Online ISSN: 1399-3003

Copyright © 2022 by the European Respiratory Society