Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of fan therapy for the relief of dyspnea in patients with chronic progressive disease. Methods: A systematic electronic database search of all available articles published before October 23, 2019 was conducted using Ichushi-Web of the Japan Medical Abstract Society databases, CENTRAL, EMBASE, and MEDLINE. In addition, a hand-search for updates was performed using PubMed on June 30, 2020 and December 7, 2021. The inclusion criteria were: 1) any RCTs comparing the effect of fan therapy with any other intervention, and 2) patients aged ≥18 years. Exclusion criteria were: 1) duplicate references, and 2) conference presentations. Results: We identified 110 studies, of which 10 met our criteria for inclusion. Finally, five studies were used in the meta-analysis. Fan therapy significantly improved dyspnea in patients with chronic progressive disease compared to control groups with a standardized mean difference of −1.43 (95% confidence interval: −2.70 to −0.17, I2=94%, p<0.0001). Conclusion: Fan therapy was found to be effective in reducing dyspnea in chronic progressive disease.

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of high-flow nasal cannula oxygen (HFNC) for dyspnea in patients with advanced disease. Methods: A literature search was conducted using MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and Ichu-shi Web. Inclusion criteria were: 1) randomized controlled trials evaluating the effect of HFNC on dyspnea; 2) aged 18 years or older with advanced disease with hypoxemia; 3) control group was conventional oxygen therapy or noninvasive positive pressure ventilation. Exclusion criteria were: 1) patients in intensive care unit, 2) weaning from ventilator. Results: Six studies (4 from database searches, and 2 from hand searches) were included. In the 2 studies evaluating short-term intervention, one showed HFNC was more efficacious, and the other conventional oxygen was more efficacious. In the 2 studies evaluating long-term interventions: one showed HFNC was more efficacious, and the other showed no significant difference. In the 2 studies evaluating the intervention during exercise, one showed HFNC was more efficacious, and the other showed no significant difference. Conclusion: HFNC may be effective for dyspnea in patients with advanced disease associated with hypoxemia.