Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
BACKGROUND: Dyspnea is a prevalent and profoundly distressing symptom. Fan therapy, a simple nonpharmacologic intervention, has shown potential in alleviating dyspnea. However, its effects remain unclear. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to update and expand the existing evidence on the effectiveness and perceptions of fan therapy in adults with dyspnea to inform clinical symptom management. METHODS: This review followed PRISMA 2020. A comprehensive literature search was performed across multiple databases, including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Data and Chinese Scientific Journals Full-text Database, from inception through March 20, 2025. Two reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Quantitative synthesis was performed using Review Manager software, version 5.3. Qualitative findings were synthesized narratively. RESULTS: = 32%). No significant differences were observed in physiological parameters, physical activity levels, self-efficacy, or caregiver-related outcomes. Furthermore, qualitative evidence indicated that patients, clinicians and caregivers generally expressed positive views toward fan therapy, considering it an effective and accessible nonpharmacological intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Fan therapy may provide short-term relief of dyspnea in adults, with limited evidence of sustained benefit and no consistent effects on physiological or other related outcomes. Given its acceptability, low-cost and portability, it may be considered a practical adjunct for dyspnea management, although longer-term trials are needed. RELEVANCE FOR CLINICAL PRACTICE: Fan therapy can be used as an adjunct to disease-targeted treatments in the management of dyspnea, particularly in community nursing, low-cost and resource-limited settings. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTIONS: Not applicable.
Yu et al. (Fri,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: