4.5 Article

Perceptions of Hyperoxemia and Conservative Oxygen Therapy in the Management of Acute Respiratory Failure

Journal

ANNALS OF THE AMERICAN THORACIC SOCIETY
Volume 18, Issue 8, Pages 1369-1379

Publisher

AMER THORACIC SOC
DOI: 10.1513/AnnalsATS.202007-802OC

Keywords

oxygen; hyperoxia; respiration; artificial

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health [HL143507, HL144804, TR001857]
  2. University of Pittsburgh Clinical Scientist Training Program

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study elucidated the diverse attitudes of ICU providers towards hyperoxemia and conservative oxygen therapy for patients with acute respiratory failure. Barriers to conservative oxygen therapy included concerns about hypoxemia, perceptions that hyperoxemia is not harmful, and a lack of clear evidence supporting conservative oxygen therapy. Interprofessional education and convincing clinical trial evidence were suggested as facilitators for the uptake of conservative oxygenation.
Rationale: Mechanically ventilated patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) are often managed to maximize oxygenation, yet hyperoxemia may be deleterious to some. Little is known about how ICU providers weigh tradeoffs between hypoxemia and hyperoxemia when managing acute respiratory failure. Objectives: To define ICU providers' mental models for managing oxygenation for patients with acute respiratory failure and identify barriers and facilitators to conservative oxygen therapy. Methods: In two large U.S. tertiary care hospitals, we performed semistructured interviews with a purposive sample of ICU nurses, respiratory therapists, and physicians. We assessed perceptions of oxygenation management, hyperoxemia, and conservative oxygen therapies through interviews, which we audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. We analyzed transcripts for representative themes using an iterative thematic-analysis approach. Results: We interviewed 10 nurses, 10 respiratory therapists, 4 fellows, and 5 attending physicians before reaching thematic saturation. Major themes included perceptions of hyperoxemia, attitudes toward conservative oxygen therapy, and aspects of titrated-oxygen-therapy implementation. Many providers did not recognize the term hyperoxemia, whereas others described a poor understanding; several stated they never encounter hyperoxemia clinically. Concerns about hyperoxemia varied: some providers believed that typical ventilation strategies emphasizing progressive lowering of the fraction of inspired oxygen mitigated worries about excess oxygen administration, whereas others maintained that hyperoxemia is harmful only to patients with chronic lung disease. Almost all interviewees expressed familiarity with lower oxygen saturations in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Cited barriers to conservative oxygen therapy included concerns about hypoxemia, particularly among nurses and respiratory therapists; perceptions that hyperoxemia is not harmful; and a lack of clear evidence supporting conservative oxygen therapy. Interviewees suggested that interprofessional education and convincing clinical trial evidence could facilitate uptake of conservative oxygenation. Conclusions: This study describes attitudes toward hyperoxemia and conservative oxygen therapy. These preferences and uncertain benefits and risks of conservative oxygen therapy should be considered during future implementation efforts. Successful oxygen therapy implementation most likely will require 1) improving awareness of hyperoxemia's effects, 2) normalizing lower saturations in patients without chronic lung disease, 3) addressing ingrained beliefs regarding oxygen management and oxygen's safety, and 4) using interprofessional education to obtain buy-in across providers and inform the ICU team.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available