Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39499692›Full record

Trial reportPloS one2024

Oxygen supplementation and cognitive function in long-COVID.

Christine Gagnon, Thomas Vincent, Louis Bherer, Mathieu Gayda, Simon-Olivier Cloutier, Anna Nozza, Marie-Claude Guertin, Patricia Blaise, Isabelle Cloutier, Alan Kamada and 3 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Christine GagnonMontreal Heart Institute, Université de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Thomas VincentMontreal Heart Institute, Université de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Louis BhererMontreal Heart Institute, Université de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Mathieu GaydaMontreal Heart Institute, Université de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Simon-Olivier CloutierMontreal Heart Institute, Université de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Anna NozzaMontreal Health Innovations Coordinating Center (MHICC), Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Marie-Claude GuertinMontreal Health Innovations Coordinating Center (MHICC), Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Patricia BlaiseMontreal Heart Institute, Université de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Isabelle CloutierMontreal Health Innovations Coordinating Center (MHICC), Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Alan KamadaInogen, Goleta, California, United States of America.
Stanislav GlezerInogen, Goleta, California, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-1498-4819
André DenaultMontreal Heart Institute, Université de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Jean-Claude TardifMontreal Heart Institute, Université de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-8200-8983

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatients can experience persistent cognitive complaints and deficits in long-COVID. Inflammation and capillary damage may contribute to symptoms by interfering with tissue oxygenation.

methodsThis was an exploratory pilot crossover study designed to describe the effects of supplemental oxygen (portable oxygen concentrator, POC) on cognitive performance and peripheral and cerebral oxygen saturation at rest and exercise. Participants with long-COVID (n = 21) were randomized 1:1 to: 1) POC (3h/day) for 2 weeks followed by standard of care (Control) for 2 weeks or 2) Control for 2 weeks then POC (3h/day) for 2 weeks, with a 1-week washout. Cognitive assessment (global cognition [Montreal Cognitive Assessment, MoCA], episodic memory [Hopkins], working memory [Digit Span], executive function [Verbal fluency]) was performed at baseline and after each treatment period. Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) and Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 were completed. Peripheral and cerebral oxygen saturation were measured at rest and exercise (treadmill) at baseline and after each treatment period. Statistical analyses were descriptive without formal testing.

resultsMoCA scores were similar under POC (26.45±2.31) and Control (26.37±2.85); overall POC-Control difference was -0.090 (95% CI [-1.031, 0.850]). Because of a learning effect, post-hoc analyses were performed for Period 1, where the MoCA score difference was 1.705 [0.140, 3.271]. MoCA subscores suggested better performance with POC for Visuospatial/executive (0.618 [-0.106, 1.342]) and Attention (0.975 [0.207, 1.743]). POC trended to have better scores on Digit Span backward (difference: 0.822 [-0.067, 1.711]) and self-reported depressive symptoms (difference: -1.335 [-3.166, 0.495]). For specific PHQ-9 items, POC tended to have lower (better) scores for Q1 (Little interest/pleasure) and Q7 (Trouble concentrating). Cerebral oxygen saturations at end of exercise showed no difference between POC and Control. Peripheral saturations during exercise were similar under POC and Control (difference: 0.519% [-1.675, 2.714]).

conclusionAn advantage of POC over Control was observed for global cognition, attention, visuospatial/executive performance and depressive symptoms. Results need to be validated in a larger study.

Indexed as

CognitionCOVID-19Cross-Over StudiesAdultAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedOxygenOxygen Inhalation TherapyOxygen SaturationPilot ProjectsPost-Acute COVID-19 SyndromeSARS-CoV-2Oxygen

Identifiers

PMID39499692
PMCPMC11537380

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.