B74-02 Pain Points, Impact on Life, and Innovation Ideas in Ambulatory Oxygen Use: Perspectives Patients With Chronic Lung Disease

Rationale Home oxygen therapy is critical for treatment of hypoxic respiratory failure in chronic lung disease. Long-term oxygen use improves survival and functionality; however, the current equipment has limitations that affect patient quality-of-life. The need for high oxygen flow (>5L/min) is not easily matched with the currently available concentrators, and it limits the longevity of portable oxygen tanks. We hypothesize that ambulatory oxygen use adds significant burden on patients, and they will have valuable insights in identifying pain-points leading to innovative solutions. Methods We conducted a survey-based study of ambulatory oxygen users with chronic lung disease who presented to pulmonary rehabilitation and clinics. Surveys were distributed in-person and online. The questionnaire included demographics, duration of oxygen use, challenges of oxygen use, impact on quality-of-life, and ideas for improvements. Descriptive and comparative analytics were performed. Results Thirty-two people participated with average age 66 (+12) years and average length of oxygen use of 5.2 (+6.5) years. Seven (21%) had COPD, 7 (21%) ILD, 12 (37.5%) pulmonary hypertension, and 15 (46.8%) had other lung diseases. The mean oxygen flow rate during activity was 5.1L/min (range: 2-15L/min) with 8 (25%) using high flow (>5L/min). All participants used oxygen concentrators and 44% used oxygen tanks in addition. The routine activity level was sedentary for 44%, light activity for 34%, and moderate activity for 22%. None reported high activity level. On average each person listed 3 challenges with use of supplemental oxygen (see table).The perceived quality-of-life was improved for 15 (46.8%), unchanged for 4 (12.5%), and worsened for 13 (40.6%) with supplemental oxygen use. There were no differences on impact based on years of oxygen use or differing flow rates. Among those who were working (n = 13), 69.2% had to change or quit their jobs due to oxygen use. Twenty-six (81%) reported avoiding social gatherings, travel, and activities of wellbeing. Among the ideas for innovations, participants prefer lighter equipment, longer battery life, more comfortable nasal prongs, and higher portability. Conclusions Patients using home oxygen report significant burden to their daily life, social activities, and work life. The impact on quality-of-life is similar among low and high oxygen users. The most common challenges include bulky size of equipment, limited mobility, tripping hazard and frequent nosebleeds. These findings show a complex relationship between life-saving oxygen therapy and patient comfort and quality-of-life. There is a dire need for innovative solutions. This abstract is funded by: None