SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Oxygen Consumption”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

148 records · Page 9Linked to original sources

PubMed2026

A Phase I Study Assessing the Safety, Tolerability, and Pharmacokinetics of Yinfenidone: A Novel, Potent Drug for Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis Treatment in Healthy Chinese Subjects.

PURPOSE: Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is a fatal interstitial lung disease with a median survival of only 2-3 years after diagnosis. Yinfenidone (HEC585) possesses the potential to inhibit the proliferation of pulmonary fibroblasts, making it a promising candidate for the treatment of IPF. This study assessed the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and metabolic profile of Yinfenidone hydrochloride capsule in healthy Chinese subjects. METHODS: This single-center, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, single ascending-dose trial included seven dose groups(20, 50, 100, 200, 400, 600, and 800 mg). Each group enrolled8 healthy subjects: 6 received Yinfenidone hydrochloride capsules and 2 received matching placebo under fasting conditions. Serial pharmacokinetic (PK) blood samples were collected pre-dose and post-dose, liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry was used to analyze the plasma concentrations of Yinfenidone. Additionally, metabolic biotransformation of Yinfenidone in plasma were conducted in the 100 mg dose group. Safety and tolerability endpoints were monitored via physical examinations, vital signs measurements, clinical laboratory tests, 12-lead electrocardiography (ECG), and adverse events (AEs) documentation throughout the trial. FINDINGS: Yinfenidone was rapidly absorbed, with a median maximum plasma concentration (Tmax) of 1.8-3.0 hours, and had a mean half-life (t1/2) ranging from 31.9 to 62.0 hours. Within the 20-100 mg dose range, systemic drug exposure generally increased with ascending dose, above 100 mg, exposure increased less than proportionally to dose. Metabolite profiling in the 100 mg group revealed that the parentcompound predominated in plasma, with metabolic pathways including mono-oxygenation and N-dealkylation. All reported AEswere mild, classified as Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 4.03 grade 1. No serious AEs observed; no subject discontinued the trial due to AEs. Single oral doses of 20-800 mg Yinfenidone hydrochloride capsules administered under fasting conditions demonstrated favorable safety and tolerability profiles in healthy Chinese subjects. IMPLICATIONS: Yinfenidone exhibited rapid absorption (median Tmax, 1.8-3.0 hours) and a long terminal t1/2 ranging from 31.9 to 62.0 hours in this single ascending-dose study, indicating that Yinfenidone can be taken once a day in subsequent clinical studies. Yinfenidone mainly exists in human plasma as the original drug and is metabolized through a variety of metabolic pathways. The AEs observed with Yinfenidone in this study, such as diarrhea, nausea, and dizziness, were similar to those reported with pirfenidone. Overall, Yinfenidone demonstrated a favorable safety and tolerability profile in this cohort of healthy subjects.

Adult↗

PubMed2026

Effect of a digitally augmented general health promotion intervention on abstinence from health-risk behaviors among emergency department discharge patients: A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) are the leading global cause of death and are driven by modifiable behaviors, such as tobacco use, harmful alcohol consumption, unhealthy diet, and physical inactivity. Recognizing that emergency department (ED) visits represent a unique opportunity to promote behavior change, this trial evaluated a digitally augmented, theory based general health promotion approach, combining a brief telephone-based intervention with mobile instant messaging support, to help discharged ED patients abstain from health risk behaviors. METHODS AND FINDINGS: This assessor-blinded randomized controlled trial was conducted in a major public hospital ED in Hong Kong. Adults (18-65 years) triaged as semi-urgent or non-urgent and with ≥1 health-risk behavior and smartphone access were randomized to receive a digitally augmented, theory‑based general health‑promotion intervention consisting of a brief telephone‑based AWARD‑model intervention (Ask, Warn, Advise, Refer, and Do-it-again) followed by weekly WhatsApp or WeChat messages for 6 months, or to a control group receiving brief telephone advice only. The primary outcome was self-report abstinence from ≥1 health-risk behavior at 6 months; secondary outcomes included the proportion of participants who achieved self-reported abstinence from ≥1 health-risk behavior at 12 months and reduction in the number of behaviors at 6 and 12 months. Of the 2,134 screened patients, 572 were enrolled (286 per group). At 6 months, 30.1% of the intervention participants versus 19.9% of the controls achieved self-reported abstinence (RR = 1.51; 95% CI, 1.13-2.02; P = 0.006). The intervention also significantly increased the likelihood of fewer risky behaviors at 6 (RR = 1.54; P = 0.01) and 12 (RR = 1.48; P = 0.02) months. Physical inactivity showed the greatest improvement at 6 months (31.7% versus 16.2%; P < 0.001). The effects attenuated after cessation of booster messaging. Limitations include reliance on self-reported outcomes, the single-center study design, and loss to follow-up, which may have affected the generalizability of the results. CONCLUSIONS: A digitally augmented, theory-based general health promotion strategy delivered at ED discharge through brief telephone intervention and mobile instant messaging support demonstrated short-term benefits in promoting self-reported abstinence and reducing health-risk behaviors at 6 months. However, the absence of a sustained effect at 12 months suggests that extended support or maintenance strategies may be required to maintain these improvements over time. Multicenter trials with longer follow-up are warranted to evaluate long-term effectiveness. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (Registration No: NCT06077565).

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Hypoxaemia and mortality in children with lower respiratory infection in low-income and middle-income countries: systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Hypoxaemic lower respiratory infections (LRIs) are a leading cause of childhood mortality, with the highest burden in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). Hypoxaemia-low peripheral capillary oxyhaemoglobin saturation (SpO2)-is a marker of severity, and WHO recommends hospitalisation and oxygen administration for patients with SpO2 <90%. We aimed to update estimates from a 2015 systematic review and meta-analysis examining the association between hypoxaemia and mortality among children with LRIs in LMICs by incorporating studies published over the subsequent decade and evaluating mortality risk across multiple SpO2 thresholds. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review with meta-analysis by searching PubMed, Embase, LILACS, Global Index Medicus, Web of Science, and Scopus for peer-reviewed studies published between Jan 1, 2015, and June 18, 2025, with combined terms related to pneumonia, children, mortality, and LMICs. We also included selected earlier studies through citation checking. Eligible studies reported associations between hypoxaemia and mortality in children younger than 5 years with LRIs in LMICs. We excluded case reports and case series with fewer than five deaths, studies focused exclusively on the neonatal period, and those limited to children with specific comorbidities or to postoperative patients, for consistency with the original review. Two reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data, and assessed quality. Eligible studies were combined with those from the original review and analysed using random-effects models to estimate odds ratios (ORs) by hypoxaemia threshold subgroup. The protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42023433946). FINDINGS: We identified 7734 records; 26 new studies met inclusion criteria and were combined with 18 from the original review. The 44 studies were published between 1993 and 2024 and were primarily from Africa (25 [57%] of 44) or Asia (19 [43%]); some studies spanned multiple locations. Data from 33 studies including 155 633 participants were included in the primary meta-analysis. Hypoxaemia of any threshold was associated with higher odds of LRI mortality (OR 4·36 [95% CI 3·52-5·39]) compared with no hypoxaemia. For SpO2 <90% versus 90-100%, OR for death was 4·75 (95% CI 3·42-6·58). For SpO2 90-94% versus 95-100%, mortality risk was more than twice as high (OR 2·27 [95% CI 1·22-4·25]). Heterogeneity was substantial (I2 64-85% across analyses), and eight (24%) of 33 studies in the primary meta-analysis had a high overall risk of bias; however, a sensitivity analysis restricted to studies with low or moderate risk of bias yielded similar results. INTERPRETATION: SpO2 <90% strongly predicts mortality in children with LRIs in LMICs. Children with SpO2 90-94% also have elevated risk, suggesting that paediatric LRI and pneumonia treatment algorithms should consider management at this hypoxaemia threshold. FUNDING: None.

Journal Article↗

PubMed2026

Multisensory stimulation for promoting development and preventing morbidity in preterm infants.

RATIONALE: Multisensory stimulation is a structured, developmentally appropriate intervention that provides simultaneous or sequential stimulation of two or more senses (e.g. tactile, auditory, visual, or vestibular) in a controlled and non-stressful manner, with the aim of supporting early neurodevelopment in preterm infants. It has the potential to enhance physiological regulation in preterm infants by stabilizing key functions, such as respiratory patterns, heart rate, and oxygen saturation; reducing the need for respiratory support; and improving feeding performance and sleep regulation. Targeted multisensory interventions have also been associated with improved neurodevelopmental outcomes, including enhanced psychomotor development and visual function. OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of multisensory stimulation compared to any single sensory intervention or standard care on major neurodevelopmental disability, mortality, and growth in preterm infants. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Emcare, CINAHL, Epistemonikos, two trial registries, and conference abstracts up to 28 November 2025. We checked reference lists of included trials, and systematic reviews on sensory interventions. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We included 18 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing multisensory stimulation in preterm infants with no intervention (placebo or standard care), and one RCT comparing multisensory stimulation with single-sense stimulation (tactile stimulation). OUTCOMES: Our critical outcomes were major neurodevelopmental disability at 18 to 24 months: cerebral palsy (CP), developmental delay, intellectual impairment, blindness, sensorineural deafness; death during initial hospitalization; and total weight gain (grams), assessed at discharge. When comparing multisensory stimulation with single-sense intervention, we also included weight gain during the intervention, an outcome added during the post-hoc analysis. Important outcomes were duration of hospital stay, of NICU stay, and of respiratory support; and time until full oral feeding. RISK OF BIAS: We used the Cochrane tool, RoB 2. SYNTHESIS METHODS: We conducted meta-analyses using fixed-effect models to calculate risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous data, and mean differences (MDs) for continuous data, each with its 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed statistical heterogeneity by calculating the I2 statistic when we included more than two trials in a meta-analysis. We evaluated the certainty of evidence using GRADE. INCLUDED STUDIES: We included 19 trials (1554 newborn infants): 18 studies compared multisensory stimulation with standard care; one compared multisensory stimulation with single-sensory stimulation (tactile). In 10 studies, the primary aim was to assess the neurobehavioral outcomes of multisensory stimulation on preterm neo-nates. The other nine studies aimed to assess the impact of multisensory stimulation on weight gain during the intervention, weight gain until hospital discharge, length of neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) stay, length of hospital stay, time until full oral feeding, length of respiratory support, or a combination. In the abstract we report results for the critical outcomes only. We identified 13 ongoing studies. Four studies are awaiting assessment. SYNTHESIS OF RESULTS: Multisensory stimulation compared to standard care No studies reported on these major neurodevelopmental disabilities, assessed at 18 to 24 months' corrected age (CA): developmental delay, intellectual impairment, blindness, or sensorineural deafness. One study reported on rates of CP at 12 months of age. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of multisensory stimulation on CP (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.28 to 1.58; I² not applicable; 1 study, 18 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence suggests that multisensory stimulation may result in little to no difference in death during initial hospitalization (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.73; I² not applicable; 1 study, 395 participants; low-certainty evidence). Multisensory stimulation may increase total weight gain prior to discharge (MD 72.67, 95% CI 68.23 to 77.12; I² = 0%; 3 studies, 474 participants; low-certainty evidence). Multisensory stimulation compared to single-sense (tactile) stimulation No studies reported on major neurodevelopmental disability, assessed at 18 to 24 months' CA, or death during initial hospitalization. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of multisensory stimulation compared to tactile stimulation on weight gain during the intervention (MD -175.00, 95% CI -376.60 to 26.60; I² not applicable; 1 study, 20 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The certainty of the evidence was low to very low across outcomes, primarily due to risk of bias, imprecision from small sample sizes and wide CIs, and in some cases, inconsistency. The evidence base was also limited by the lack of reporting of relevant outcomes and reliance on surrogate outcomes or shorter follow-up periods. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The available evidence on multisensory stimulation in preterm infants is limited and of low to very low certainty. No included studies reported on major neurodevelopmental disabilities at 18 to 24 months' CA, which represented a critical outcome for this review. Evidence regarding the effect of multisensory stimulation on CP is very uncertain, as it is based on a single small study reporting a surrogate outcome at 12 months. Multisensory stimulation may result in little to no difference in mortality during the initial hospitalization. It may increase total weight gain prior to discharge. However, the clinical significance of this finding is uncertain, particularly given the low certainty of the evidence and the multifactorial nature of growth in preterm infants. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of multisensory stimulation compared to single-sense (tactile) stimulation on weight gain during the intervention. The only included study did not report major neurodevelopmental disabilities at 18 to 24 months' CA, mortality during the initial hospitalization, or total weight gain prior to discharge, which represented the critical outcomes for this review. Overall, the current evidence does not allow firm conclusions about the effectiveness of multisensory stimulation in promoting development or preventing morbidity in preterm infants. Future studies on multisensory stimulation should use more rigorous designs, larger samples, and report interventions using the template for intervention description and replication (TIDieR) checklist to ensure transparency. They should also report essential outcomes, such as neonatal death, major neurodevelopmental disabilities, length of hospital and NICU stay, time to full oral feeding, duration of respiratory support, and weight gain, to better assess the long‑term effects of multisensory stimulation in preterm infants. FUNDING: This Cochrane review had no dedicated funding. REGISTRATION: Protocol available via DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD016073.

Humans↗