This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility and clinical performance of portable pulse oxygen concentrators in hospital settings. A total of 109 inpatients from four departments—General Medicine, Respiratory Medicine, Geriatrics, and Critical Care Rehabilitation—were enrolled. Each patient underwent oxygen therapy using both a portable pulse-dose oxygen device and a conventional wall-mounted continuous-flow system. Key physiological indicators, including oxygen saturation (SpO₂), heart rate (HR), and respiratory rate (RR), were recorded and compared. Statistical analysis showed no significant difference in SpO₂ between the two methods (P=0.24), while HR showed borderline improvement (P=0.051), and RR showed significant improvement with the portable device (P=0.008). Most patients were able to maintain stable parameters at low to medium flow settings, indicating good efficiency and adaptability. The portability of the device also enhanced patient mobility and comfort, especially in rehabilitation and geriatric care scenarios. The findings suggest that portable oxygen concentrators provide comparable clinical effectiveness to wall-mounted systems and offer added benefits in terms of flexibility and usability. These results support the device’s potential role as a supplementary option in inpatient oxygen therapy.

Xu Xiao. Feasibility Study of Portable Pulse Oxygen Therapy Devices in Inpatient Settings: A Clinical Pilot Analysis Based on 109 Cases. International Journal of Frontiers in Medicine (2025), Vol. 7, Issue 3: 24-29. https://doi.org/10.25236/IJFM.2025.070303.

[1] Chinese Thoracic Society. Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (2021 edition) . Chin J Tuberc Respir Dis, 2021, 44(3)：170-205. doi:10.3760/cma.j.en112147-20210109-00031.

[2] Jacobs SS, Krishnan JA, Lederer DJ, Ghazipura M, Hossain T, Tan AM, Carlin B, Drummond MB, Ekström M, Garvey C, Graney BA, Jackson B, Kallstrom T, Knight SL, Lindell K, Prieto-Centurion V, Renzoni EA, Ryerson CJ, Schneidman A, Swigris J, Upson D, Holland AE. Home Oxygen Therapy for Adults with Chronic Lung Disease. An Official American Thoracic Society Clinical Practice Guideline. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2020 Nov 15;202(10):e121-e141. doi: 10.1164/rccm.202009-3608ST.

[3] Okubadejo AA, Paul EA, Jones PW, Wedzicha JA. Does long-term oxygen therapy affect quality of life in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and severe hypoxaemia? Eur Respir J. 1996;9(11):2335–2339. doi: 10.1183/09031936.96.09112335.

[4]Ringbaek T, Martinez G, Lange P. The long-term effect of ambulatory oxygen in normoxaemic COPD patients: a randomised study. Chron Respir Dis. 2013;10(2):77–84. doi: 10.1177/1479972312473135.

[5] World Health Organization. Oxygen Sources and Distribution for COVID-19 Treatment Centres: Interim Guidance. Geneva: WHO; 2020. Available from: https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/331746.