ArticleInternational journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease2019
Are pulmonologists well aware of planning safe air travel for patients with COPD? The SAFCOP study.
Article in International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- From Dialysis to Destinations: Safe Travel Strategies for Patients With CKD.Kidney international reports · 2025Review
- Effects of Altitude on Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Patients: Risks and Care.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Assessing Patients for Air Travel.Chest · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Patients with respiratory diseases are more prone to health risks of air travel. Purpose: The aim of this study was to investigate the current knowledge and attitudes of Turkish pulmonary physicians for air travel in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Participants and methods: A questionnaire was developed and administered either by congress mobile phone application or by e-mail. A total of 242 physicians participated in the study (75 by mobile phone application and 167 through the e-mail). Results: Among participants, only 30.6% reported that they usually inform COPD patients about possible risks of air travel in their routine practice. A preflight assessment was performed by 61.2% of them and a fit to fly report was prepared by 34.3%. The most common methods/tests used for preflight assessment were reported as oxygen saturation with pulse oximetry, arterial blood gas analysis, and pulmonary function tests (51.2%, 50.8%, and 49.6%, respectively). When the participants were asked to plan safe air travel in two clinical case scenarios, only 16.2% were able to answer both cases correctly. Conclusion: This study shows that a standard approach for preflight assessment in patients with COPD is lacking and an active initiative is needed to increase awareness and education for fit to fly concept for COPD among pulmonologists.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.