PURLs

Supplemental oxygen: More isn’t always better

Author and Disclosure Information

 

References

WHAT’S NEW

High-quality evidence points to the dangers of liberal O2 therapy

This comprehensive meta-analysis is the first high-quality evidence to suggest that liberal use of oxygen in acutely ill adults above a specific SpO2 level increases all-cause mortality. Previous small RCTs and observational studies have examined the effect of liberal oxygen only on specific presenting conditions, thus making more generalizable conclusions challenging.9-12

CAVEATS

Varied definitions of “liberal” and “conservative”

This review included studies with variable ranges of SpO2 defined as liberal vs conservative supplementation. However, in all of these, SpO2 above 96% was correlated with unfavorable outcomes.

This meta-analysis is the first high-quality evidence to suggest that liberal use of oxygen in acutely ill adults above a specific SpO2 level increases all-cause mortality.

The study excluded 2 potentially important patient groups: patients with chronic respiratory diseases and pregnant patients. Increased oxygen supplementation in patients with chronic respiratory diseases in noncritical settings has been shown to be deleterious.13-15 While this study does not address the issue of oxygen supplementation in acutely ill patients with chronic respiratory disease, use should be considered with caution. The results from this study may not be generalizable to women who are pregnant.

CHALLENGES TO IMPLEMENTATION

Reversing the tide

Liberal oxygen administration continues to be practiced in many health care settings. The main challenges to implementing the conclusions of this study are these pervasive practices.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

The PURLs Surveillance System was supported in part by Grant Number UL1RR024999 from the National Center For Research Resources, a Clinical Translational Science Award to the University of Chicago. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Center For Research Resources or the National Institutes of Health.

Pages

Copyright © 2019. The Family Physicians Inquiries Network. All rights reserved.

Online-Only Materials

AttachmentSize
PDF icon jfp06811e10_methodology.pdf132.16 KB

Next Article: