BACKGROUND

Patients with severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) could have palliative care (PC) needs because of unmet needs such as dyspnoea. This may lead to anxiety and may have an impact on patients' ability to perform daily activities of living. PC can be started when patients with COPD have unmet needs and can be provided alongside disease-modifying therapies. Non-invasive ventilation (NIV) could be an important measure to manage dyspnoea in patients with COPD in need of PC. A scoping review was conducted to gain an overview of the existing research and to identify knowledge gaps. The aim of this scoping review was to systematically map published studies on the use of NIV in patients with COPD with PC needs, including the perspectives and experiences of patients, families, and healthcare professionals (HCPs).

METHODS

This review was conducted following the framework of Arksey and O'Malley. The reporting of the review was guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews checklist. The review protocol was published. AMED, CINAHL, Embase, MEDLINE, PEDro, and PsycInfo were searched from inception to November 14, 2022. The included studies had to report the perspectives and experiences of COPD patients, relatives, and HCPs regarding NIV in the care of patients with COPD with PC needs. In pairs, the authors independently assessed studies' eligibility and extracted data. The data were organised thematically. The results were discussed in a consultation exercise.

RESULTS

This review included 33 papers from 32 studies. Four thematic groupings were identified: preferences and attitudes towards the use of NIV; patient participation in the decision-making process of NIV treatment; conflicting results on the perceived benefits and burdens of treatment; and heterogenous clinical outcomes in experimental studies. Patients perceived NIV as a 'life buoy' to keep them alive. Many patients wanted to take part in the decision-making process regarding NIV treatment but expressed varying degrees of inclusion by HCPs in such decision-making. Conflicting findings were identified regarding the perceived benefits and burdens of NIV treatment. Diversity in heterogeneous clinical outcomes were reported in experimental studies.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a need for more studies designed to investigate the effectiveness of NIV as a palliative measure for patients with COPD with PC needs using comprehensive outcomes. It is especially important to gain more knowledge on the experiences of all stakeholders in the use of home-based NIV treatment to these patients.