Intensive care doctors' preferences for arterial oxygen tension levels in mechanically ventilated patients

Clinicians' attitudes towards supplemental oxygen for trauma patients - A survey

INTRODUCTION

The Advanced Trauma Life Support guidelines (ATLS; 2018, 10th ed.) recommend an early and liberal supplemental oxygen for all severely injured trauma patients to prevent hypoxaemia. As of 2024, these guidelines remain the most current. This may lead to hyperoxaemia, which has been associated with increased mortality and respiratory complications. We aimed to investigate the attitudes among clinicians, defined as physicians and prehospital personnel, towards the use of supplemental oxygen in trauma cases.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A European, web-based, cross-sectional survey was conducted consisting of 23 questions. The primary outcome was the question: "In your opinion, should all severely injured trauma patients always be given supplemental oxygen, regardless of arterial oxygen saturation measured by pulse oximetry?".

RESULTS

The survey was answered by 707 respondents, which corresponded to a response rate of 52 %. The respondents were predominantly male (76 %), with the largest representation from Denmark (82 %), and primarily educated as physicians (62 %). A majority of respondents (73 % [95 % CI: 70 to 76 %]) did not support that supplemental oxygen should always be provided to all severely injured trauma patients without consideration of their arterial oxygen saturation as measured by pulse oximetry (SpO2), with no significant difference between physicians and non-physicians (p = 0.08). Based on the respondents' preferred dosages, the median initial administered dosage of supplemental oxygen for spontaneously breathing trauma patients with a normal SpO2 in the first few hours after trauma was 0 (interquartile range [IQR] 0-3) litres per minute, with 58 % of respondents opting not to provide any supplemental oxygen. The lowest acceptable SpO2 goal in the first few hours after trauma was 94 % (IQR 92-95). In clinical scenarios with TBI, higher dosage of supplemental oxygen and fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2) were preferred, as well as targeting partial pressure of oxygen in arterial blood as opposed to adjusting the FiO2 directly, compared to no TBI.

CONCLUSION

Almost three out of four clinicians did not support the administration of supplemental oxygen to all severely injured trauma patients, regardless of SpO2. This corresponds to a more restrictive approach than recommended in the current ATLS (2018, 10th ed.) guidelines.

Effects of a lower versus a higher oxygenation target in intensive care unit patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure: a subgroup analysis of a randomised clinical trial

Background

Oxygen supplementation is ubiquitous in intensive care unit (ICU) patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and acute hypoxaemia, but the optimal oxygenation target has not been established.

Methods

This was a pre-planned subgroup analysis of the Handling Oxygenation Targets in the ICU (HOT-ICU) trial, which allocated patients with acute hypoxaemia to a lower oxygenation target (partial pressure of arterial oxygen [Pao2] of 8 kPa) vs a higher target (Pao2 of 12 kPa) during ICU admission, for up to 90 days; the allocation was stratified for presence or absence of COPD. Here, we report key outcomes for patients with COPD.

Results

The HOT-ICU trial enrolled 2928 patients of whom 563 had COPD; 277 were allocated to the lower and 286 to the higher oxygenation group. After allocation, the median Pao2 was 9.1 kPa (inter-quartile range 8.7-9.9) in the lower group vs 12.1 kPa (11.2-12.9) in the higher group. Data for arterial carbon dioxide (Paco2) were available for 497 patients (88%) with no between-group difference in time-weighted average; median Paco2 6.0 kPa (5.2-7.2) in the lower group vs 6.2 kPa (5.4-7.3) in the higher group. At 90 days, 122/277 patients (44%) in the lower oxygenation group had died vs 132/285 patients (46%) in the higher (relative risk 0.98; 95% confidence interval 0.82-1.17; P=0.67). No statistically significant differences were found in any secondary outcome.

Conclusions

In ICU patients with COPD and acute hypoxaemia, a lower vs a higher oxygenation target did not reduce mortality. There were no between-group differences in Paco2 or in secondary outcomes.

Clinical trial registration

NCT03174002, EudraCT number 2017-000632-34.

Conservative versus Liberal Oxygenation Targets in Intensive Care Unit Patients (ICONIC): A Randomized Clinical Trial

Rationale: Supplemental oxygen is widely administered to ICU patients, but appropriate oxygenation targets remain unclear. Objectives: This study aimed to determine whether a low-oxygenation strategy would lower 28-day mortality compared with a high-oxygenation strategy. Methods: This randomized multicenter trial included mechanically ventilated ICU patients with an expected ventilation duration of at least 24 hours. Patients were randomized 1:1 to a low-oxygenation (PaO2, 55-80 mm Hg; or oxygen saturation as measured by pulse oximetry, 91-94%) or high-oxygenation (PaO2, 110-150 mm Hg; or oxygen saturation as measured by pulse oximetry, 96-100%) target until ICU discharge or 28 days after randomization, whichever came first. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality. The study was stopped prematurely because of the COVID-19 pandemic when 664 of the planned 1,512 patients were included. Measurements and Main Results: Between November 2018 and November 2021, a total of 664 patients were included in the trial: 335 in the low-oxygenation group and 329 in the high-oxygenation group. The median achieved PaO2 was 75 mm Hg (interquartile range, 70-84) and 115 mm Hg (interquartile range, 100-129) in the low- and high-oxygenation groups, respectively. At Day 28, 129 (38.5%) and 114 (34.7%) patients had died in the low- and high-oxygenation groups, respectively (risk ratio, 1.11; 95% confidence interval, 0.9-1.4; P = 0.30). At least one serious adverse event was reported in 12 (3.6%) and 17 (5.2%) patients in the low- and high-oxygenation groups, respectively. Conclusions: Among mechanically ventilated ICU patients with an expected mechanical ventilation duration of at least 24 hours, using a low-oxygenation strategy did not result in a reduction of 28-day mortality compared with a high-oxygenation strategy. Clinical trial registered with the National Trial Register and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (NTR7376).

Early Titration of Oxygen During Mechanical Ventilation Reduces Hyperoxemia in a Pilot, Feasibility, Randomized Control Trial for Automated Titration of Oxygen Levels

Timely regulation of oxygen (Fio₂) is essential to prevent hyperoxemia or episodic hypoxemia. Exposure to excessive Fio₂ is often noted early after onset of mechanical ventilation. In this pilot study, we examined the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of a clinical trial to prioritize Fio₂ titration with electronic alerts to respiratory therapists.

Determining a target SpO2 to maintain PaO2 within a physiological range

OBJECTIVE

In the context of an ongoing debate on the potential risks of hypoxemia and hyperoxemia, it seems prudent to maintain the partial arterial oxygen pressure (PaO2) in a physiological range during administration of supplemental oxygen. The PaO2 and peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO2) are closely related and both are used to monitor oxygenation status. However, SpO2 values cannot be used as an exact substitute for PaO2. The aim of this study in acutely ill and stable patients was to determine at which SpO2 level PaO2 is more or less certain to be in the physiological range.

METHODS

This is an observational study prospectively collecting data pairs of PaO2 and SpO2 values in patients admitted to the emergency room or intensive care unit (Prospective Inpatient Acutely ill cohort; PIA cohort). A second cohort of retrospective data of patients who underwent pulmonary function testing was also included (Retrospective Outpatient Pulmonary cohort; ROP cohort). Arterial hypoxemia was defined as PaO2 < 60 mmHg and hyperoxemia as PaO2 > 125 mmHg. The SpO2 cut-off values with the lowest risk of hypoxemia and hyperoxemia were determined as the 95th percentile of the observed SpO2 values corresponding with the observed hypoxemic and hyperoxemic PaO2 values.

RESULTS

220 data pairs were collected in the PIA cohort. 95% of hypoxemic PaO2 measurements occurred in patients with an SpO2 below 94%, and 95% of hyperoxemic PaO2 measurements occurred in patients with an SpO2 above 96%. Additionally in the 1379 data pairs of the ROP cohort, 95% of hypoxemic PaO2 measurements occurred in patients with an SpO2 below 93%.

CONCLUSION

The SpO2 level marking an increased risk of arterial hypoxemia is not substantially different in acutely ill versus stable patients. In acutely ill patients receiving supplemental oxygen an SpO2 target of 95% maximizes the likelihood of maintaining PaO2 in the physiological range.

Lower or Higher Oxygenation Targets for Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure

BACKGROUND

Patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure in the intensive care unit (ICU) are treated with supplemental oxygen, but the benefits and harms of different oxygenation targets are unclear. We hypothesized that using a lower target for partial pressure of arterial oxygen (Pao₂) would result in lower mortality than using a higher target.

METHODS

In this multicenter trial, we randomly assigned 2928 adult patients who had recently been admitted to the ICU (≤12 hours before randomization) and who were receiving at least 10 liters of oxygen per minute in an open system or had a fraction of inspired oxygen of at least 0.50 in a closed system to receive oxygen therapy targeting a Pao₂ of either 60 mm Hg (lower-oxygenation group) or 90 mm Hg (higher-oxygenation group) for a maximum of 90 days. The primary outcome was death within 90 days.

RESULTS

At 90 days, 618 of 1441 patients (42.9%) in the lower-oxygenation group and 613 of 1447 patients (42.4%) in the higher-oxygenation group had died (adjusted risk ratio, 1.02; 95% confidence interval, 0.94 to 1.11; P = 0.64). At 90 days, there was no significant between-group difference in the percentage of days that patients were alive without life support or in the percentage of days they were alive after hospital discharge. The percentages of patients who had new episodes of shock, myocardial ischemia, ischemic stroke, or intestinal ischemia were similar in the two groups (P = 0.24).

CONCLUSIONS

Among adult patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure in the ICU, a lower oxygenation target did not result in lower mortality than a higher target at 90 days. (Funded by the Innovation Fund Denmark and others; HOT-ICU ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03174002.).

Oxygen therapy practices in the acutely ill medical patients: A social media-based nationwide study of clinicians’ preferences and summary of current recommendations

Oxygen is the most commonly used drug in emergency medicine. The aim of this study was to identify healthcare professionals’ preferences regarding oxygen therapy in common medical emergencies. An online 9-part-questionnaire was distributed through Facebook to doctors and nurses working in Greek hospitals. The questionnaire included background information of the respondents and addressed individual preferences regarding best oxygenation parameter and oxygen targets in specific acute settings. We received 678 responses and we included 663 in our analysis. We found significant differences between doctors’ and nurses’ attitudes towards oxygenation targets in ARDS, sepsis, acute coronary syndrome, and post cardiac-arrest patients. Nurses preferred a more conservative oxygen strategy compared to doctors. Furthermore, nurses favor SaO2 as the best oxygenation parameter, while doctors prefer PaO2. In our survey, the type of hospital and department of the respondents did not affect the preferred oxygen strategy. Social media-based survey research is feasible and effective. In this single country study, doctors showed a tendency to liberally administer oxygen in acutely ill medical patients. On the other hand, Greek nurses preferred a more conservative approach.

Higher versus lower fraction of inspired oxygen or targets of arterial oxygenation for adults admitted to the intensive care unit

BACKGROUND

The mainstay treatment for hypoxaemia is oxygen therapy, which is given to the vast majority of adults admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). The practice of oxygen administration has been liberal, which may result in hyperoxaemia. Some studies have indicated an association between hyperoxaemia and mortality, whilst other studies have not. The ideal target for supplemental oxygen for adults admitted to the ICU is uncertain. Despite a lack of robust evidence of effectiveness, oxygen administration is widely recommended in international clinical practice guidelines. The potential benefit of supplemental oxygen must be weighed against the potentially harmful effects of hyperoxaemia.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of higher versus lower fraction of inspired oxygen or targets of arterial oxygenation for adults admitted to the ICU.

SEARCH METHODS

We identified trials through electronic searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, BIOSIS Previews, CINAHL, and LILACS. We searched for ongoing or unpublished trials in clinical trials registers. We also scanned the reference lists of included studies. We ran the searches in December 2018.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared higher versus lower fraction of inspired oxygen or targets of arterial oxygenation for adults admitted to the ICU. We included trials irrespective of publication type, publication status, and language. We included trials with a difference between the intervention and control groups of a minimum 1 kPa in partial pressure of arterial oxygen (PaO2), minimum 10% in fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2), or minimum 2% in arterial oxygen saturation of haemoglobin/non-invasive peripheral oxygen saturation (SaO2/SpO2). We excluded trials randomizing participants to hypoxaemia (FiO2 below 0.21, SaO2/SpO2 below 80%, and PaO2 below 6 kPa) and to hyperbaric oxygen.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors independently, and in pairs, screened the references retrieved in the literature searches and extracted data. Our primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, the proportion of participants with one or more serious adverse events, and quality of life. None of the trials reported the proportion of participants with one or more serious adverse events according to the International Conference on Harmonisation Good Clinical Practice (ICH-GCP) criteria. Nonetheless, most trials reported several serious adverse events. We therefore included an analysis of the effect of higher versus lower fraction of inspired oxygen, or targets using the highest reported proportion of participants with a serious adverse event in each trial. Our secondary outcomes were lung injury, acute myocardial infarction, stroke, and sepsis. None of the trials reported on lung injury as a composite outcome, however some trials reported on acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and pneumonia. We included an analysis of the effect of higher versus lower fraction of inspired oxygen or targets using the highest reported proportion of participants with ARDS or pneumonia in each trial. To assess the risk of systematic errors, we evaluated the risk of bias of the included trials. We used GRADE to assess the overall certainty of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 10 RCTs (1458 participants), seven of which reported relevant outcomes for this review (1285 participants). All included trials had an overall high risk of bias, whilst two trials had a low risk of bias for all domains except blinding of participants and personnel. Meta-analysis indicated harm from higher fraction of inspired oxygen or targets as compared with lower fraction or targets of arterial oxygenation regarding mortality at the time point closest to three months (risk ratio (RR) 1.18, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.01 to 1.37; I2 = 0%; 4 trials; 1135 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Meta-analysis indicated harm from higher fraction of inspired oxygen or targets as compared with lower fraction or targets of arterial oxygenation regarding serious adverse events at the time point closest to three months (estimated highest proportion of specific serious adverse events in each trial RR 1.13, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.23; I2 = 0%; 1234 participants; 6 trials; very low-certainty evidence). These findings should be interpreted with caution given that they are based on very low-certainty evidence. None of the included trials reported any data on quality of life at any time point. Meta-analysis indicated no evidence of a difference between higher fraction of inspired oxygen or targets as compared with lower fraction or targets of arterial oxygenation on lung injury at the time point closest to three months (estimated highest reported proportion of lung injury RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.36; I2 = 0%; 1167 participants; 5 trials; very low-certainty evidence). None of the included trials reported any data on acute myocardial infarction or stroke, and only one trial reported data on the effects on sepsis.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We are very uncertain about the effects of higher versus lower fraction of inspired oxygen or targets of arterial oxygenation for adults admitted to the ICU on all-cause mortality, serious adverse events, and lung injuries at the time point closest to three months due to very low-certainty evidence. Our results indicate that oxygen supplementation with higher versus lower fractions or oxygenation targets may increase mortality. None of the trials reported the proportion of participants with one or more serious adverse events according to the ICH-GCP criteria, however we found that the trials reported an increase in the number of serious adverse events with higher fractions or oxygenation targets. The effects on quality of life, acute myocardial infarction, stroke, and sepsis are unknown due to insufficient data.

Handling Oxygenation Targets in the Intensive Care Unit (HOT-ICU)-Protocol for a randomised clinical trial comparing a lower vs a higher oxygenation target in adults with acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure

BACKGROUND

Acutely ill adults with hypoxaemic respiratory failure are at risk of life-threatening hypoxia, and thus oxygen is often administered liberally. Excessive oxygen use may, however, increase the number of serious adverse events, including death. Establishing the optimal oxygenation level is important as existing evidence is of low quality. We hypothesise that targeting an arterial partial pressure of oxygen (PaO₂ ) of 8 kPa is superior to targeting a PaO₂ of 12 kPa in adult intensive care unit (ICU) patients with acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure.

METHODS

The Handling Oxygenation Targets in the ICU (HOT-ICU) trial is an outcome assessment blinded, multicentre, randomised, parallel-group trial targeting PaO₂ in acutely ill adults with hypoxaemic respiratory failure within 12 hours after ICU admission. Patients are randomised 1:1 to one of the two PaO₂ targets throughout ICU stay until a maximum of 90 days. The primary outcome is 90-day mortality. Secondary outcomes are serious adverse events in the ICU, days alive without organ support and days alive out of hospital in the 90-day period; mortality, health-related quality-of-life at 1-year follow-up as well as 1-year cognitive and pulmonary function in a subgroup; and an overall health economic analysis. To detect or reject a 20% relative risk reduction, we aim to include 2928 patients. An interim analysis is planned after 90-day follow-up of 1464 patients.

CONCLUSION

The HOT-ICU trial will test the hypothesis that a lower oxygenation target reduces 90-day mortality compared with a higher oxygenation target in adult ICU patients with acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure.