Skip to main content
 

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Editor's Commentary
    • Coming Next Month
    • Archives
    • Most-Read Papers of 2021
  • Authors
    • Author Guidelines
    • Submit a Manuscript
  • Reviewers
    • Reviewer Information
    • Create Reviewer Account
    • Reviewer Guidelines: Original Research
    • Reviewer Guidelines: Reviews
    • Appreciation of Reviewers
  • CRCE
    • Through the Journal
    • JournalCasts
    • AARC University
    • PowerPoint Template
  • Open Forum
    • 2022 Call for Abstracts
    • 2021 Abstracts
    • Previous Open Forums
  • Podcast
    • English
    • Español
    • Portugûes
    • 国语
  • Videos
    • Video Abstracts
    • Author Interviews
    • Highlighted Articles
    • The Journal

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
American Association for Respiratory Care
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
American Association for Respiratory Care

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Editor's Commentary
    • Coming Next Month
    • Archives
    • Most-Read Papers of 2021
  • Authors
    • Author Guidelines
    • Submit a Manuscript
  • Reviewers
    • Reviewer Information
    • Create Reviewer Account
    • Reviewer Guidelines: Original Research
    • Reviewer Guidelines: Reviews
    • Appreciation of Reviewers
  • CRCE
    • Through the Journal
    • JournalCasts
    • AARC University
    • PowerPoint Template
  • Open Forum
    • 2022 Call for Abstracts
    • 2021 Abstracts
    • Previous Open Forums
  • Podcast
    • English
    • Español
    • Portugûes
    • 国语
  • Videos
    • Video Abstracts
    • Author Interviews
    • Highlighted Articles
    • The Journal
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • YouTube
Research Article28th Annual New Horizons Symposium: The Scientific Basis for Respiratory Care

Evidence for Oxygen Use in the Hospitalized Patient: Is More Really the Enemy of Good?

Thomas C Blakeman
Respiratory Care October 2013, 58 (10) 1679-1693; DOI: https://doi.org/10.4187/respcare.02677
Thomas C Blakeman
Division of Trauma and Critical Care, Department of Surgery, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, Ohio.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: [email protected]
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Oxygen in arguably one of the most frequently utilized drugs in modern healthcare, but is often administered to patients at caregivers' discretion with scant evidence as to its efficacy or safety. Although oxygen is administered for varied medical conditions in the hospital setting, published literature supports the use of oxygen to reverse hypoxemia, for trauma victims with traumatic brain injury and hemorrhagic shock, for resuscitation during cardiac arrest, and for carbon monoxide poisoning. Oxygen should be titrated to target an SpO2 of 94–98%, except with carbon monoxide poisoning (100% oxygen), ARDS (88–95%), those at risk for hypercapnia (SpO2 88–92%), and premature infants (SpO2 88–94%). Evidence for use with other conditions for which oxygen is administered relies on anecdotal experiences, case reports, or small, underpowered studies. Definitive conclusions for oxygen use in these conditions where efficacy and/or safety are uncertain will require large randomized controlled clinical trials.

  • oxygen therapy
  • normoxia
  • hypoxemia
  • hyperoxemia
  • oxygen efficacy
  • oxygen safety

Introduction

In 1772 Swedish pharmacist Carl Scheele discovered that when heating mercuric oxide and potassium nitrate, candles burned brighter. Scheele did not publish his findings until 1777. Meanwhile, chemist Joseph Priestley was conducting his own experiments with mercuric oxide. His experiments describing “dephlogisticated air” were published in 1775, which credited him with the discovery of oxygen.1 At this time the chemical theory of phlogiston stated that by burning, the combustible components of a substance are released into the atmosphere. Priestley believed that by heating the mercury he was removing phlogiston (impurities) from the atmosphere, pulling it into the mercury, thus purifying the air. Priestley theorized that dephlogisticated air may have medical applications in serious cases of lung disease, but also warned that use in the healthy body may be harmful. His statement “As a candle burns out much faster in dephlogisticated than in common air, so we might, as may be said, live out too fast, and the animal powers be too soon exhausted in this pure kind of air” has applications today, as we seek to determine how much oxygen is too much. For the purpose of this paper, the discussion of oxygen therapy pertains only to adults, unless otherwise stated.

Early Oxygen Use

Following Priestley's published findings, Antoine Lavoisier repeated his and Scheele's experiments and proved that oxygen was a chemical element, disproving the phlogiston theory.2 In 1778 he named the gas oxygen “acid former,” due to his belief that it was a component of all acids. Five years later a French physician treated a patient suffering from tuberculosis with daily inhalations of oxygen, which is believed to be the first medical use of the gas.1 Throughout most of the 19th century, pure oxygen therapy was not available to the public. Mostly diluted nitric oxide, “compound oxygen,” was widely believed to be a panacea for many common ailments. George Holtzapple is credited with publishing the first case report describing the administration of intermittent oxygen therapy, to a 16-year-old male with lobar pneumonia, at York Hospital in 1885. The patient's cyanosis improved with oxygen therapy and he subsequently recovered.3 It was not until 1890 that Albert Blodgett administered continuous flow oxygen to a patient with pneumonia to relieve shortness of breath.4 He estimated that around 200 gallons of oxygen per day was needed for continuous administration: approximately 6 L/min.

Modern Oxygen Therapy

The understanding of therapy and physiology advanced quickly during the early 1900s, due to the gas poisonings during World War I, and advances in basic science.1 Physiologists Adolph Fick and Paul Bert further advanced oxygen physiology by describing oxygen in units of partial pressure, which led to the understanding of the differences between arterial and venous blood oxygenation and the relationship to cardiac output and oxygen consumption. John Haldane published the first paper on the rational use of oxygen in 1917.5 Much of what we consider to be the basic physiologic concepts of oxygenation can be attributed to Haldane. In his paper he describes the respiratory drive as regulated by carbon dioxide, the different types or causes of hypoxemia, and tissue hypoxemia in carbon monoxide (CO) poisoning. He further describes the mechanisms of ventilation-perfusion matching and mismatching and the role of supplemental oxygen as a treatment. Haldane was also the first to describe the effects of oxygen on the pulmonary system.

Oxygen use on the battlefield was first reported during World War I, primarily for the treatment of phosgene gas poisoning.6 When mixed with water in the lungs, phosgene forms hydrochloric acid, damaging alveolar lining, and at high doses leads to pulmonary edema and eventually to what we know today as ARDS. Oxygen was also used in the treatment of trench nephritis, acute bronchitis, and severe hemorrhage. Oxygen treatment on the battlefield was accomplished by the use of equipment developed by Haldane, which consisted of a pressurized cylinder, pressure regulator, a reservoir, and mask, much like what is currently used today. Experiences learned from the war helped develop a basic understanding of rational oxygen use, ways to administer, and what did not work: mainly intermittent usage in a hypoxic patient. Evidence for oxygen use in trauma care was also gained from the war experience. Despite evidence of the benefit of continuous therapy on the battlefield and the publishing of Haldane's book, Respiration,7 many physicians continued to prescribe intermittent oxygen therapy into the first half of the 20th century.

Indications for Oxygen Therapy

Supplemental oxygen is an important part of modern medical care. From prehospital to in-hospital care and anesthesia applications, to long-term usage in chronic lung disease, oxygen use has become so common that it is often taken for granted. Although it is considered a drug and should be prescribed as such, oxygen is often given to patients at the caregiver's whim, and frequently without a physician's order.8,9 This occurrence in the hospital setting is common because oxygen is readily available, abundant, and cheap when employing the large liquid systems, as do most hospitals. Even after a century's experience and numerous publications concerning oxygen administration, the question remains: what are the evidence-based indications for oxygen therapy in hospitalized patients?

The American Association for Respiratory Care provides guidance for in-hospital use of oxygen other than with mechanical ventilators and hyperbaric chambers.10 The recommended indications are documented hypoxemia (PaO2 < 60 mm Hg or SaO2 < 90%), suspected hypoxemia, severe trauma, acute myocardial infarction, and short-term therapy such as post-anesthesia recovery or surgical intervention. The British Thoracic Society's11,12 and Western Australian Hospital's indications for supplemental oxygen are to maintain normal or near normal SpO2 (94–98%) for all patients not at risk for hypercapnic respiratory failure, and SpO2 of 88–92% for those at risk. This guidance specifically states that patients suffering from myocardial infarction and acute coronary syndrome have the same SpO2 targets as above. Additionally, the guidance states that non-hypoxic breathless patients (other than CO poisoning) do not benefit from oxygen therapy and does not recommend supplementation. Both of the latter associations recommend the use of an oxygen alert card for those patients at risk for hypercapnic respiratory failure, so that in an emergency the appropriate low FIO2 will be administered.

The remainder of this paper will detail the diseases/conditions for which oxygen is often prescribed as a treatment, and the available evidence to support or refute its use.

Oxygen Myths

John Downs presented the 2002 Donald F Egan Scientific Lecture entitled “Has Oxygen Administration Delayed Appropriate Respiratory Care? Fallacies Regarding Oxygen Therapy.”13 Downs outlined what he believed to be 3 commonly held beliefs and the related evidence regarding oxygen therapy.

Fallacy 1

FIO2 ≤ 0.6 is Safe.

This is what we were all taught in respiratory school, or at least that FIO2 > 0.6 produced more adverse effects and FIO2 < 0.6 produced less. Downs collaborated on a study that treated 54 subjects with ARDS by using high levels of PEEP and decreasing FIO2 as soon as possible.14 The study reported an 80% survival rate. A decade later it was reported that subjects who had the lowest PaO2/FIO2 (80 mm Hg) had the lowest mortality, as compared to those who had the highest PaO2/FIO2 (∼200 mm Hg).15 The major emphasis was lowering the FIO2 as soon as possible, by applying high levels of PEEP while tolerating a PaO2 as low as 50 mm Hg. Most subjects were breathing FIO2 of 0.3–0.4 within 6 hours of intubation.

Register et al conducted a study with subjects undergoing open heart surgery, all of whom were breathing room air preoperatively.16 It was found that in subjects administered FIO2 of 0.5 postoperatively had a greater degree of hypoxemia on room air on postoperative day 2 than those given sufficient oxygen to maintain SpO2 ≥ 90%. After repeating the study using only room air intra- and post-operatively, and finding that most subjects did not have a decrease in blood oxygen levels, as compared to preoperative values, it was postulated that the hypoxemia experienced in the first study was due to the use of oxygen during and after surgery.17

Garner et al exposed rats with peritonitis to FIO2 of 0.8, 0.4, or 0.21. Mortality was lowest in the FIO2 0.2 group, and highest in the FIO2 0.8 group.18 Upon postmortem examination it was found that lung pathology did not differ between the groups but there was substantial liver damage with FIO2 > 0.21. It was postulated that free radical formation caused the liver damage.

Fallacy 2

High FIO2 is Protective.

This stems from the belief that elevating the FIO2 and subsequently the PaO2 provides a margin of safety and time to react if a patient's clinical condition deteriorates. While this appears logical and is seen frequently in our ICU, the opposite may be the case. According to Downs, the only true indication for prophylactic hyperoxygenation is prior to tracheal intubation.19 Downs further states that, hypothetically, a patient on FIO2 of 1.0 and having a PaO2 of 650 mm Hg, could drop to 90 mm Hg due to lung function deterioration over a period of 15–20 min, but the SpO2 would not drop below 98%.13 This drop would not be enough to indicate a problem. But over the next 5 minutes the SpO2 would drop to 92%, alerting the caregiver to investigate. In this scenario the elapsed time until a problem is detected would be 20–25 min. If that same patient was on FIO2 of 0.3 with a PaO2 of 90 mm Hg and an SpO2 of 99% and experienced the same problem, the SpO2 would decrease to 94% within 10 min, alerting caregivers to a problem much earlier. Additionally, if a patient is already receiving FIO2 of 1.0, there is no room to increase once a problem is detected.

Fallacy 3

Supplemental Oxygen is Useful.

This stems from the “it may not help, but it won't hurt” mentality. In emergency departments, post-anesthesia care units, and during conscious sedation, oxygen is routinely administered despite the lack of evidence to support the practice. In fact, profound hypoventilation can occur without an SpO2 decrease if oxygen is supplemented. Patients breathing room air who have a small decrease in ventilation will be alerted much earlier by the SpO2 reading, so the caregiver can intervene.20 For this reason Downs suggests that postoperative patients not be administered oxygen unless SpO2 is < 90% and simulation is ineffective.

Downs listed 6 primary conditions that can cause arterial hypoxemia and the specific treatments for each.13 In only one condition, low FIO2, does he recommend that supplemental oxygen is the treatment of choice. His reasoning for the lack of recommendation for oxygen in the other conditions is the belief that, yes, PaO2 will be increased, but will delay the diagnosis and treatment with the appropriate therapy.

Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

The World Health Organization estimates that there are 210 million people worldwide living with COPD, making it a major health issue in many countries.21 It is estimated that in the United States alone the cost to manage patients with the disease exceeded $49 billion in 2010.22 An additional $73 billion was associated with hospital admissions. Although oxygen is among the standard management treatments, it was shown over 50 years ago that high FIO2 increases blood carbon dioxide concentration in some COPD patients.23 The British Thoracic Society recommends that until an arterial blood gas is obtained, any patient with known or suspected COPD not be given an FIO2 > 0.28.24

Denniston et al conducted a prospective audit of 97 subjects with the diagnosis of COPD admitted to the emergency department, representing 101 episodes of COPD exacerbation.25 At some point in the pre-hospital or emergency department setting, 56% received an FIO2 > 0.28. For those subjects who received an FIO2 > 0.28, in-hospital mortality was 14% (8 of 57) versus 2% (1 of 44) for those who received an FIO2 ≤ 0.28. Demographics and smoking history were not different between the 2 groups. Interestingly, in the ambulance those subjects who either self-identified or were identified by the crew as having COPD received a mean FIO2 of 0.47, versus 0.6 if they were not identified. Although the ambulance crew administered a lower FIO2 to those subjects identified as having the diagnosis of COPD, it was still well above the recommended FIO2.

In a prospective study including 972 subjects admitted to the emergency department with the diagnosis of COPD, Plant et al found that 20% had respiratory acidosis.26 In 47% of the hypercapnic subjects, pH was inversely related to PaO2, with most being associated with a PaO2 > 75 mm Hg. As in the aforementioned study by Denniston, the acidotic subjects had a higher in-hospital morality than the non-acidotic subjects (12.8% vs 6.9%).

A recent study comparing high flow with titrated oxygen administration in the pre-hospital setting in 405 subjects with COPD (214 confirmed) was conducted by Austin and colleagues.27 Subjects were randomized into 2 groups: oxygen via nasal cannula titrated to SpO2 of 88–92%, or 8–10 L/min of oxygen via non-rebreathing mask. Both groups received standard of care bronchodilator treatments enroute to the hospital. The study results showed that titrating oxygen to maintain an SpO2 of 88–92% reduced the risk of death from hypercapnia and respiratory failure by 58% in all subjects, and by 78% in those with confirmed COPD. In the high flow oxygen group the number needed to harm was 14.

Evidence

The need for titrated oxygen is often ignored in the prehospital and emergency settings, presumably due to the belief that hypoxemia is worse for the patient than hyperoxemia. In the COPD patient population this may not be the case. The current literature provides overwhelming evidence that in patients with documented or suspected COPD, titrating oxygen to an SpO2 of 88–92% reduces the risk of death due to respiratory failure, especially in those susceptible to hypercapnia. Since most oxygen therapy is initiated prehospital, protocols must be implemented to ensure appropriate oxygen therapy is administered throughout the prehospital and hospital course. An interesting concept of providing patients with cards stating that they have a COPD diagnosis and to titrate oxygen to keep the SpO2 88–92% has been suggested by the British Thoracic Society, in order to identify these patients quickly. A similar approach of a medical alert bracelet or necklace, much like is done for allergies, would also be effective.

Infants/Neonates

François Chaussier used oxygen in attempts to revive what he termed “near dead” infants, beginning in 1780,28 but it was not until the 1930s that physicians began using oxygen routinely with neonates.29 In 1938, Chapple reported delivering FIO2 of approximately 0.46 to an incubator to treat preterm infants.30 A decade later, Terry documented over 100 cases of a new type of blindness present in premature infants,31 but it was not until 1951 that Campbell32 linked supplemental oxygen to the cause of what was initially termed retrolental fibroplasia and is currently known as retinopathy of prematurity (ROP). The first randomized controlled trial (RCT) to study the association of supplemental oxygen with ROP was published in 1952 by Patz et al.33 The infants were randomized to either an FIO2 of 1.0 or titrated oxygen to treat hypoxemia. In the FIO2 1.0 group, 61% of the infants developed ROP, versus 16% in the titrated oxygen group.

In a retrospective study of risk factors for developing ROP in 2009, Hua et al34 found that infants that breathed FIO2 of > 0.8 for any length of time, and those who received any supplemental oxygen for > 8 days had the highest incidence. Additionally, the lower the birth weight, the higher the incidence of ROP for those infants who received oxygen. This study concurred with a 1977 study by Kinsey et al, finding that birth weight < 1,200 g and length of exposure to oxygen increased ROP risk.35

Early studies that confirmed the association between oxygen and ROP helped to increase awareness of the problem, but, due to lack of ability to continuously measure arterial oxygenation, many premature infants were left profoundly hypoxic, for fear that administering oxygen would lead to ROP. The resulting hypoxia led to increased incidence of cerebral palsy. An early paper from 196136 reported that, in a study of 1,080 premature infants, supplemental oxygen administration for < 2 days showed a 17% increase in cerebral palsy, whereas oxygen exposure for > 10 days resulted in a 22% increase in ROP. This was the first study to show that there can be neither too little nor too much oxygen given to premature infants. In a multicenter RCT involving 358 preterm infants, Askie et al showed no difference in growth and development in those infants with SpO2 of 91–94% than those with SpO2 of 95% and above.37

The use of oxygen in the resuscitation of infants in the delivery room has received considerable attention in the last decade. In a paper reviewing the available literature on this subject, Richmond and Goldsmith38 found that in both animal and human studies, although the results were mixed, there was a trend toward resuscitation with room air being as effective as using 100% oxygen. Animal studies showed that using air was nearly as effective as FIO2 of 1.0 in reducing pulmonary vascular resistance and may prevent rebound pulmonary vascular resistance increases post-resuscitation. Most of the human studies only examined short-term outcomes, such as survival, Apgar score, and time to first breath, and most were not randomized.

The most recently published study, from the Benefits of Oxygen Saturation Targeting (BOOST) II Collaborative Group,39 showed that in 3 RCTs including 2,448 extremely pre-term infants (< 28 weeks gestation), targeting oxygen saturation < 90% resulted in a statistically significant increased risk of death (P = .002), compared to the comparative group targeting saturation of 91–95%. Although the lower targeted saturation group had a significantly reduced incidence of ROP, the infants also had a significant increase in the rate of developing necrotizing enterocolitis.

Evidence

Judicious use of oxygen with neonates is warranted, although the safe FIO2 and duration of use are still questionable. The literature clearly shows that administering oxygen despite an SpO2 ≥ 90% increases the risk of ROP and bronchopulmonary dysplasia. Conversely, maintaining an SpO2 < 85% increases the risk of cerebral palsy. During resuscitation of infants in the delivery room, the use of room air or low levels of oxygen may reduce pulmonary vascular resistance and increase survival. Additional randomized human studies examining short- and long-term effects of various levels of oxygen use during resuscitation are needed.

The American Association for Respiratory Care clinical practice guideline recommends using caution when administering oxygen to preterm infants, infants with congenital heart lesions, those suffering from paraquat poisoning, or those receiving certain chemotherapy agents.40 The guidance also cautions that oxygen flow may stimulate laryngeal nerves and alter respiratory patterns. Additionally, oxygen should be administered to treat hypoxemia and prevent hyperoxemia.

Trauma

Patients suffering from multiple traumatic injuries are nearly always placed on supplemental oxygen, even if not intubated. Oxygen use in emergency care has been mandated in Advanced Trauma Life Support,41 Prehospital Trauma Life Support,42 and Advanced Cardiac Life Support,43 despite scant evidence regarding efficacy and/or safety in this patient population. Oxygen supplementation begins at the point of injury and continues until presentation to the emergency department, usually via a non-rebreathing mask at 15 L/min, often despite SpO2 readings of 100%. It has been witnessed on numerous occasions in our facility's emergency department: a patient brought in by the life squad wearing a non-rebreathing mask while talking on a cell phone, with the mouthpiece tucked under the mask. Clearly, oxygen administration was not indicated in this situation. The Prehospital Trauma Life Support guidelines42 for oxygen administration are based on the patient's spontaneous breathing frequency (Table 1). Other than with a normal breathing frequency,12–20 the recommendation is to administer an FIO2 of at least 0.85, with no mention of arterial oxygenation parameters.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table 1.

Prehospital Trauma Life Support Recommendations for Administering Oxygen Based on Spontaneous Breathing Frequency

Much of what the civilian medical community has learned about treating trauma victims was born from the military experiences in treating the casualties of war. Few studies have been conducted to determine how much oxygen trauma patients require, and most are observational. Stockinger and McSwain44 retrospectively reviewed data from 5,090 spontaneously breathing trauma patients who presented to a civilian trauma center, in an attempt to determine the oxygen needs of trauma patients, in order to advance knowledge for military needs. Forty-three percent of the patients received oxygen, and they died more often than those who did not receive oxygen (2.3% vs 1.1%). Even after correcting for Injury Severity Score, mechanism of injury, and age, those who did not receive oxygen had no worse outcome than those who received oxygen, suggesting that supplementing oxygen does not improve outcomes in trauma patients who are not in respiratory distress.

Barnes et al conducted a prospective study to determine oxygen requirements and usage during transcontinental flights transporting mechanically ventilated wounded war fighters from Iraq to Germany with the Air Force Critical Care Air Transport Teams.45 During the 6–8 hour flight an integrated computer recorded the ventilator settings and pulse oximetry readings. Oxygen was titrated according to the standard of care guidelines, keeping SpO2 ≥ 94%. Twenty-two patients' data were recorded, resulting in 117 hours of continuous data. After calculating oxygen usage (L/min), it was found that the mean usage was 3.24 L/min, with a mean FIO2 of 0.49 for all patients. Sixty-eight percent of the patients required ≤ 3 L/min, suggesting that oxygen requirements for trauma patients may be much lower than what is currently being administered.

Hemorrhagic shock is the leading cause of death in trauma patients, and poses a different set of problems when trying to determine appropriate oxygen administration. Hemorrhagic shock is a result of blood loss that may lead to decreased oxygen supply and cellular hypoxia despite normal arterial oxygenation indicators. Knight et al performed a literature review to increase understanding of the effects of oxygen administration following hemorrhagic shock.46 The review found that FIO2 of 1.0 and resuscitation are the most common treatments following hemorrhagic shock, although there is concern that hyperoxia may increase free radical formation and further cell damage. The literature suggested serum lactate should be monitored to assess cellular hypoxia and possibly guide oxygen administration, although the appropriate level remains unclear.

Despite anecdotal and sparse research data, there is no consensus for determining in which trauma patients to administer oxygen, and how much. The United States Special Operations Command's Tactical Combat Casualty Care guidelines state that oxygen may be beneficial for the following patients47:

  • Low oxygen saturation by pulse oximetry

  • Injuries associated with impaired oxygenation

  • Unconscious casualty

  • Casualty in shock

  • Casualty at altitude

  • Casualty with traumatic brain injury (maintain SpO2 > 90%)

Traumatic brain injury represents challenges when caring for a trauma patient, and is a leading cause of death and disability.48 Much of the available literature's focus is on prehospital management of traumatic brain injury. It is well known that secondary brain injury can develop as a result of several factors, including inappropriate ventilation, glycemic control, cerebral edema, hypotension, and cerebral hypoxia.49–51 Hypoxia has been identified as an independent risk factor for poor outcome with traumatic brain injury.50 Providing oxygen to the injured brain is crucial to mitigating secondary brain injury, but the appropriate level of PaO2 remains unclear, since adequate arterial oxygenation may not always equate to adequate brain oxygenation. Chi et al performed a prospective cohort study in 150 trauma patients with suspected head injury undergoing helicopter transport.52 The study goal was to determine the incidence of hypoxia and hypotension and to assess mortality and disability. Thirty-seven subjects had hypoxic episodes. The mortality for subjects without any secondary insults was 20%, versus 37% for those who had hypoxic episodes. Surviving subjects who experienced hypoxia also had a greater degree of disability at hospital discharge. In an attempt to determine the relationship between hypoxemia and hyperoxemia and outcome, Davis et al performed a retrospective review of 3,420 subjects treated for traumatic brain injury.53 The study found that mild hyperoxemia (PaO2 110–487 mm Hg) was associated with increased survival, while hypoxemia (PaO2 < 110 mm Hg) and extreme hyperoxemia (PaO2 > 487 mm Hg) were associated with increased mortality.

Although monitoring and treating intracranial pressure remains the standard of care, devices to measure brain-tissue oxygenation are being utilized. Martini and associates54 reviewed the available published literature on this practice and found that monitoring brain-tissue oxygenation has shown value in determining poor prognosis following traumatic brain injury, and that interventions to increase cerebral perfusion pressure and PaO2 can result in increased brain-tissue oxygenation. The authors' review also found that retrospective studies suggest that maintaining a target brain-tissue oxygenation (usually 20 mm Hg) may have potential benefits, but prospective studies showed no outcome benefits.

Evidence

Many trauma patients need little or no oxygen. Oxygen administration should be titrated to achieve normoxemia for all trauma patients except for traumatic brain injury and hemorrhagic shock with increased lactate. There is some evidence that mild to moderate hyperoxemia may increase survival with traumatic brain injury. Hypoxemia and extreme hyperoxemia with traumatic brain injury are associated with a worse outcome. The evidence is still unclear on whether to monitor and target brain-tissue oxygenation and to manipulate physiologic parameters to maintain that target, especially with mounting evidence that hyperoxemia may have deleterious effects. Adequately powered randomized clinical trials are necessary to evaluate the outcome benefits of this practice.

ARDS

ARDS was first described by Ashbaugh et al in 1967. Historically, the mortality rate for ARDS was reportedly 40–60%55–58 by most accounts, until the turn of the 21st century, when new therapeutic studies emerged that improved outcome. The ARDS Network clinical trial, published in 2001, was the first evidence that ARDS mortality can be improved by changes in mechanical ventilation practice.59 This landmark study showed that reducing tidal volumes to as low as 4–6 mL/kg of ideal body weight reduced mortality by 22%. Additionally the study supported oxygenation by the use of a PEEP/FIO2 table to maximize lung recruitment and minimize oxygen exposure, due to earlier evidence in animal models that high FIO2 may be toxic. The targeted range for oxygenation was PaO2 55–88 mm Hg and SpO2 88–95%. Although the best strategy for using PEEP and FIO2 has not been identified, mounting evidence suggests the use of the lowest FIO2 possible and the use of adequate PEEP to increase oxygenation without producing cardiovascular side effects.60

Kallet and Branson61 performed a literature review in an effort to determine if the ARDS Network study's PEEP/FIO2 table is the best method for maintaining oxygenation and minimizing oxygen exposure. The authors found that, since the PEEP required for most patients with ARDS is relatively low, the use of the ARDS Network PEEP/FIO2 table is supported by high level evidence, although there is a small subset of patients who may require an individualized approach to setting PEEP and FIO2.

Evidence

ARDS is a condition that is difficult to manage and that requires a balance between ventilating with low tidal volumes and providing the right level of PEEP to support oxygenation and minimizing the harmful effects of high oxygen exposure. Although the results of the ARDS Network trial provide the best evidence for use of the PEEP/FIO2 table to adjust these variables, and the evidence in the literature suggests the table may be adequate, there is no consensus as to how to best adjust PEEP and FIO2 for all patients with ARDS. The most important factor to consider is to balance the risk of pressure injury to the lung, by using excessive PEEP and tidal volume, and the risk of oxygen toxicity.

Myocardial Infarction

According to Centers for Disease Control statistics, heart disease is the leading cause of death in the United States, accounting for more than 600,000 fatalities annually.62 Myocardial infarction accounts for more than half of these deaths. For more than 100 years oxygen has been used to treat myocardial infarction and angina,63 with little evidence as to the efficacy or potential harm of this practice. Oxygen administration can cause vasoconstriction, regardless of arterial saturation, and raise blood pressure and lower cardiac oxygen consumption, heart rate, and cardiac index.64–66 Foster et al found that as PaO2 increased, so did arterial pressure and systemic vascular resistance.67 Kenmure et al68 and Thomas et al69 found an increase in blood pressure and decrease in cardiac output when patients suffering from a myocardial infarction breathed FIO2 of 0.4. McNulty et al, using a Doppler flow wire, showed in 18 subjects that coronary vascular resistance increased by 41% and coronary blood flow decreased by 29% when the subjects breathed FIO2 of 1.0 for 15 min.70 These works showed the physiologic effects of oxygen administration on the coronary system, but the effect on outcome was not evaluated.

Wijesinghe et al performed a review of the published literature that included RCTs of oxygen therapy in myocardial infarction.71 Of 51 potential studies, only 2 met the inclusion criteria. One of the studies of 200 subjects randomized to either room air or 6 L/min oxygen for 24 hours after having a myocardial infarction found that deaths and the incidence of ventricular tachycardia were higher in the oxygen group, but the difference was not statistically significant. Opiate use was not different between the groups. The other study randomized 50 subjects to either room air or 4 L/min oxygen for 24 hours. Although more subjects experienced an episode of oxygen desaturation, 80% in the room air group (P < .01), there was statistically no difference in the incidence of ventricular tachycardia and opiate use between groups. Mortality was not evaluated.

Kones's review of oxygen use for acute myocardial infarction found there are no large randomized studies available for evaluation.72 He found that the evidence supporting oxygen use in patients having acute myocardial infarction but who had normal oxygen saturation was old and of poor quality. Kones noted that recent physiological evidence that oxygen use in this patient population that are not hypoxemic suggests that there is no evidence of benefit and may be harmful. His conclusion was that, in these patients, oxygen should be administered only if saturation drops below 94%, although there is no evidence to support this recommended saturation level.

A recent Cochrane Collaborative meta-analysis cited 3 RCTs comparing groups given oxygen or air when experiencing a myocardial infarction.73 The 3 studies included 387 subjects, with 14 of those dying. Of those 14, nearly 3 times as many subjects in the oxygen group died, compared to those given air. Although this suggests that oxygen administration may be harmful, definitive conclusions cannot be drawn because the studies had small numbers of subjects, so the results may have happened by chance. The authors' conclusion was that a large RCT is required to refute or confirm these findings.

Evidence

There is no conclusive evidence for or against using supplemental oxygen for patients experiencing a myocardial infarction. Standard practice is still as pervasive as it was 100 years ago: apply oxygen to all myocardial infarction patients. What little evidence there is in the current literature suggests giving oxygen to hypoxemic patients experiencing a myocardial infarction to maintain arterial saturation of 94–98%. Large RCTs are required to definitively determine the correct practice.

Cardiac Arrest

Cardiac arrest often results from a myocardial infarction. Even if return of spontaneous circulation is achieved, nearly 60% of these patients will not survive.74 The high mortality has been associated with anoxic brain injury, cardiac stunning, and reperfusion injury.75 High concentration oxygen administration during the post-cardiac-arrest period has been questioned as a potential contributor to the high mortality after return of spontaneous circulation. Kilgannon and associates conducted 2 multicenter cohort studies76,77 using the Project IMPACT critical care database to examine the effect of hyperoxia after cardiac arrest and the effect on mortality. The first study76 included 6,326 subjects, and the end point was in-hospital mortality. The subjects were divided into 3 groups: hyperoxia (defined as PaO2 ≥ 300 mm Hg), hypoxia (defined as PaO2 < 60 mm Hg or PaO2/FIO2 < 300 mm Hg), and normoxia (defined as PaO2 60–300 mm Hg).

Of the 6,326 subjects, 18% had hyperoxia, 63% had hypoxia, and 19% had normoxia. The hyperoxia group had significantly higher in-hospital mortality (63%) than did the normoxia group (45%) or the hypoxia group (57%). In the second study77 using the Project IMPACT database, Kilgannon's group evaluated 4,459 subjects post-cardiac-arrest to determine the relationship between PaO2 and in-hospital mortality. Of the 4,459 subjects, 54% died. The observed PaO2 values were divided into 5 groups: 60–99, 100–199, 200–299, 300–399, and ≥ 400 mm Hg. The results of the study showed that there was an association between increased PaO2 and increased mortality, even in those subjects who did not have supranormal PaO2. For every 100 mm Hg increase in PaO2 there was a 24% increase in the relative risk of death. Interestingly, a 25% increase in PaO2 resulted in a 6% relative risk of death. The results of this study suggest that since a relatively small increase in PaO2 increases mortality, limiting supplemental oxygen as much as possible after cardiac arrest may be beneficial. It is hypothesized that increased free radical formation caused by high concentration delivery, along with reperfusion injury, may be responsible for the increased mortality.

Evidence

Retrospective studies show that hyperoxia, and possibly normoxia, when supplementing oxygen to post-cardiac-arrest patients may increase mortality. Subjects with hyperoxemia had significantly higher mortality that those with hypoxemia or normoxemia, suggesting that maintaining normoxemia (SpO2 94–98%) should be the standard practice until large clinical trials are conducted to provide definitive guidelines.

Congestive Heart Failure

Patients with congestive heart failure often suffer from dyspnea and hypoxia. High concentration oxygen is often given to these patients, despite previous studies showing that administering FIO2 of 1.0 to healthy subjects decreases cardiac output and increases systemic vascular resistance.78,79 Little is known about the hemodynamic effects of oxygen administration in these patients. Haque et al conducted a small study in which 22 subjects with class 3 and 4 heart failure were divided into 3 separate experiments.80 Experiment 1 involved 10 subjects having hemodynamic variables measured while breathing room air and then after breathing an FIO2 of 1.0 for 20 min. Experiment 2 involved 7 subjects having the same hemodynamic measurements collected after breathing room air and then after 5 min on FIO2 of 0.24, 0.40, and 1.0. FIO2 of 1.0 significantly reduced cardiac output and stroke volume, and increased pulmonary capillary wedge pressure and systemic vascular resistance, as compared to breathing room air (P < .01). Graded oxygen showed a progressive decrease in cardiac output (P < .001) and stroke volume (P < .02), and an increase in systemic vascular resistance (P < .005). Additionally, SaO2 progressively increased, from 93.6 ± 1.5% on room air to 100.0 ± 0% on FIO2 of 1.0. Based on the results of this small study, the authors recommend that, in the absence of hypoxemia, oxygen should be used cautiously with patients suffering from severe congestive heart failure.

Evidence

Evidence for use of oxygen with congestive heart failure is scarce. The few available studies are small and too underpowered to make a determination about oxygen administration in these patients. The available literature suggests that inducing hyperoxemia in patients with congestive heart failure may be harmful. Oxygen use should be limited to those patients who exhibit hypoxemia and should be titrated to achieve normoxia. Large RCTs are needed to confirm these findings.

Stroke

Oxygen is frequently administered to patients suffering from a stroke in the prehospital setting, and is often continued in the hospital, despite current guidelines that recommend not administering oxygen to non-hypoxic patients.81 The pervasive idea that oxygen therapy is beneficial stems from the fact that ischemic stroke causes a decrease in oxygen to the brain, resulting in tissue hypoxia and cell death. The prevailing logic is that neuroprotection can be achieved by raising oxygen levels in ischemic tissues.82 Extending the logic further, it was thought that hyperbaric oxygen therapy, which can produce extreme hyperoxemia, would be beneficial for stroke patients, but clinical trials failed to show any benefit.83–85 It is well established that hyperoxemia increases free radical formation and could induce cerebral vasoconstriction and reduced blood flow.79,86 Animal studies have shown increased mortality when exposed to high oxygen levels following cerebral ischemia.87,88

Pancioli and associates performed a retrospective chart review of 167 non-intubated, ischemic stroke patients totaling 600 in-patient days at a university hospital to determine whether these patients had indications for supplemental oxygen.89 The criteria used for supplemental oxygen therapy are listed in Table 2. Sixty-one percent of the subjects received supplemental oxygen at some point during their hospital stay, which accounted for 322 days of receiving oxygen. Of those 322 days, 46% met at least one of the pre-established criteria for oxygen use. Of the 348 days in which criteria for supplemental oxygen were not met, the subjects still received oxygen 46% of the time. The authors estimated that not giving oxygen when it is not indicated could produce up to 45% savings in resources. Ronning and Guldvog90 conducted an RCT including 500 subjects to determine whether FIO2 of 1.0 for the first 24 hours after stroke would reduce mortality, neurological impairment, or disability, as compared to receiving no oxygen. The subjects in the room air group had a higher 1 year survival, but the difference was not statistically significant (P = .30). For subjects with severe stroke there was a statistically nonsignificant tendency toward a higher 1 year survival in the oxygen group (P = .60). Neurological impairment and disability did not differ between the 2 groups. The authors concluded that oxygen should not routinely be given to patients suffering from acute stroke.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table 2.

Indications for Supplemental Oxygen Therapy

Evidence

The American Heart Association Stroke Council recommends against oxygen usage for stroke patients. Animal models suggest that giving high levels of oxygen in those with cerebral ischemia may be harmful. The limited evidence in the literature suggests that giving oxygen to patients suffering from acute stroke does not produce any benefit in outcomes, although there may be a small mortality benefit, which needs to be studied further, for those patients having suffered from a severe stroke. A further benefit for not routinely giving oxygen to stroke patients may be in decreased use of resources.

Wound Infection

Surgical wound infection is a serious complication that can increase hospital stays and costs,91–93 and increase morbidity and mortality.94,95 Bacterial tissue contamination establishes wound infections within a few hours post-surgery,96 so interventions during this time have the greatest potential to prevent a severe infection. Prophylactic antibiotic therapy is the most common perioperative intervention to prevent wound infection. Due to laboratory evidence that oxidative bactericidal activity is highly dependent on increasing the oxygen tension in a wound,97 it has been suggested that providing high levels of perioperative oxygen may attenuate bacterial wound infections.

Greif and associates98 conducted an RCT including patients undergoing colorectal surgery to receive FIO2 of either 0.3 or 0.8 intraoperatively, and for 2 hours postoperatively. All subjects received prophylactic antibiotic therapy. Wounds that were culture positive were considered infected. Subjects in the FIO2 0.8 group had significantly less wound infections, versus those in the FIO2 0.3 group (5% vs 11%, P = .01). Hospital lengths of stay were similar.

In a smaller study, conducted in Israel, 38 subjects undergoing elective colorectal surgery were also randomized to receive the same oxygen concentrations and length of therapy as in the Greif study.99 The wound infection rate in the FIO2 0.8 group was higher than in the FIO2 0.3 group, but the difference was not statistically significant (P = .53), although this could have been due to the small sample size. Even though the infection rates were not lower in the high oxygen group, the authors could not make a definitive recommendation for the use or non-use of high oxygen concentration.

Evidence

The current evidence for use of high concentration oxygen to reduce surgical wound infections is mixed. Larger RCTs are required to clarify the issue. Until such trials are conducted, maintaining normoxemia in these patients should be the standard of care, especially with mounting evidence that prolonged hyperoxemia may have other untoward effects.

Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is common, with an occurrence of 20–70% despite current pharmaceutical interventions.100–102 The unpleasantness for the patient notwithstanding, PONV can increase the risk of aspiration pneumonia and can lead to delayed discharge and unexpected hospital admissions following surgery.103 Recent research suggests that supplemental oxygen may have a positive effect on PONV following selected surgical procedures.

Greif et al conducted an RCT in 231 subjects undergoing colon resection, to receive FIO2 of either 0.8 or 0.3 during surgery and 2 hours afterward.104 The incidence of PONV during the first 24 hours postoperatively was recorded. PONV was observed in 17% of the subjects who received FIO2 0.8, versus 30% in the FIO2 0.3 group (P = .03).

Ghods et al105 randomized 106 subjects undergoing cesarean birth to receive 8 L/min oxygen for 6 hours postoperatively or 5 L/min in the recovery room and no oxygen thereafter, and evaluated the incidence of PONV during the first 6 postoperative hours. PONV occurred in 28% of subjects in the 8 L/min group, and nearly 25% in the control group. The difference between groups was not statistically significant (P = .66).

Joris et al106 conducted an RCT randomizing 150 subjects to receive either FIO2 of 0.3, FIO2 of 0.8, or FIO2 of 0.3 oxygen with droperidol, during thyroidectomy, and evaluated the incidence of PONV for 24 hours post-surgery. There was no difference in the incidence of PONV in the FIO2 0.3 and 0.8 groups (48% vs 46%), but the group receiving FIO2 of 0.3 plus droperidol was 22%, which was statistically different from the other 2 groups (P = .004). Time to first meal was significantly shorter in the droperidol group.

Treschan et al107 randomly assigned 210 subjects having strabismus surgery to the same study arms as the Joris study, with the difference being the use of ondansetron instead of droperidol. PONV was evaluated postoperatively at 6 and 24 hours. As opposed to the Joris study, there was no statistical difference in the incidence of PONV between any of the 3 groups (P = .28), although the incidence was lower for the ondansetron group (28%) versus the FIO2 0.8 group (38%) and the FIO2 0.3 group (41%). The low number of subjects in each group may account for the lack of statistical significance.

Evidence

Evidence for the use of supplemental oxygen to treat/prevent PONV is mixed. Despite Akca and Sessler's108 claim, after reviewing 3 studies, that oxygen use may best prevent PONV following abdominal surgery, this is not always the case, because one study they reviewed showed no difference. Much larger clinical trials must be done to provide more compelling evidence.

Cluster Headache

The first description of cluster headaches (CH) was given by London neurologist Wilfred Harris in 1926.109 His treatment for these subjects was alcohol injections around the supraorbital and infraorbital nerve. Horton first described the use of oxygen for the treatment of CH in 1952,110 and was brought to the forefront by Kudrow in 1981.111 This first systematic study compared oxygen by mask at 7 L/min for 15 min versus sublingual ergotamine. The study showed that both treatments were effective in aborting CH attacks, but oxygen aborted over 70% of the attacks in 82% of the subjects, whereas ergotamine worked as well in only 70% of the subjects. The average response time with oxygen to abort the CH was 6 min, versus 10–12 min with ergotamine.

In 1985, Fogan conducted a small double-blind crossover study comparing oxygen versus air, both at 6 L/min, for the treatment of CH.112 Subjects scored their degree of relief with each therapy, with the relief score being significantly higher when inhaling oxygen versus air (P = .01). The average relief score was 1.93 for oxygen inhalation and 0.77 for air inhalation, out of a possible 3.

More recently, Garza conducted a double-blind RCT of 109 subjects with CH to alternately receive 12 L/min oxygen or air via mask for 15 min at the onset of an attack.113 The primary end point was complete or adequate pain relief at 15 min. The results showed that the primary end point was reached 78% of the time with oxygen inhalation, versus 20% with air (P = .001). Oxygen was also superior to air concerning the secondary end points of pain free at 30 min, pain reduction at 60 min, and need for additional medication 15 min after treatment.

Although the efficacy of oxygen administration for treatment of CH is well documented, there have been observations of rebound CH post-treatment. The rebound effect is defined as a CH that returns more rapidly than usual following complete relief after oxygen inhalation, or an increased number of attacks in a 24 hour period. Geerlings et al performed a retrospective study and found 8 subjects who experienced rebound CH.114 In these subjects the mean duration until the next CH was 39 min after using oxygen to treat the previous CH versus 933 min if oxygen was not used. The mean frequency of CH per day was 4.1 when using oxygen, versus 2.5 without using oxygen. It is hypothesized that use of lower flow (7 L/min or less) may lead to rebound CH in susceptible patients. Cohen et al evaluated the effectiveness of using 12–15 L/min oxygen for treatment of CH.115 While headache relief was comparable to studies using lower flows, no rebound CH were reported.

Evidence

The literature overwhelmingly shows that oxygen is an effective treatment for CH, without any documented side effects. However, in susceptible patients, rebound CH may occur following a previous oxygen treatment, but the mechanism is unclear. It has been suggested that higher oxygen flow may attenuate the rebound effect, but the evidence is mostly anecdotal. Studies are required to determine if higher oxygen flow minimizes rebound CH and to determine the appropriate flow to use.

Carbon Monoxide Poisoning

Carbon monoxide (CO) poisoning is the leading cause of poisoning death in the United States. CO poisoning is sometimes overlooked because the clinical signs and symptoms are not the same for all patients. It is well established that hemoglobin's affinity for CO is over 200 times higher than for oxygen and that blood CO levels in excess of 20% can affect the brain and heart, due to their high metabolic rate.116 Tissue hypoxia is the hallmark of CO poisoning, so oxygen is the standard treatment, although pulse oximetry readings are unreliable due to the device being unable to distinguish between oxygen and CO bound to the hemoglobin. In the late 1800s, Haldane showed that high oxygen tension can counteract the hemoglobin to CO affinity.117 The half-life of CO while breathing room air is approximately 5 hours. Breathing normobaric FIO2 of 1.0 reduces the half-life to 1 hour, and hyperbaric oxygen therapy reduces the half-life to 20 min.118–120

Evidence

All CO poisoned patients should receive an FIO2 of 1.0 at atmospheric pressure for at least 6 hours or longer, depending on blood CO level. If available, hyperbaric oxygen should be used for patients with severe CO poisoning (ie, CO level > 20%, unconscious, those with neurologic deficit, or pregnant women with or without symptoms).116

Breathlessness

One of the most controversial and misunderstood uses of supplemental oxygen is for patients experiencing breathlessness. Breathlessness is a common symptom of advanced lung, cardiac, and neuromuscular disease, and the intensity increases as death approaches.121,122 Even with increased understanding of breathlessness and the pharmacologic and non-pharmacological interventions available, it remains difficult to manage. Breathlessness makes caregivers and healthcare providers feel helpless, further complicating management. Upon conducting a survey, Abernethy and associates found that 70% of clinicians would prescribe oxygen for breathlessness despite normal oxygen saturation, and 35% would prescribe oxygen if the patient asked for it.123 Hypoxemia does not appear to be the driving force in chronic breathlessness.

Abernethy et al conducted a double-blind RCT in 239 subjects with refractory breathlessness, and evaluated the effectiveness of administering 2 L/min oxygen, as compared to 2 L/min air.124 The study results showed that morning breathlessness improved more in the oxygen group, but improved more in the evening with the air group. Improvement in quality of life was no different between groups, nor was there a difference in breathlessness over a 24 hour period. Breathlessness scores of subjects with moderate to severe breathlessness improved most, irrespective of the treatment arm. The authors concluded that the study results suggest it is the flow of gas through the nasal passages that improves the feeling of breathlessness, regardless of whether oxygen or air is used.

Johnson et al conducted a meta-analysis of the available literature focusing on oxygen to treat chronic refractory breathlessness.125 Of the 13 studies reviewed, 2 showed a benefit when supplementing oxygen to breathless subjects. These 2 studies involved COPD patients, and the benefit of oxygen administration was small and limited to breathlessness as a result of exertional desaturation in one study. The remaining studies show no benefit of administering oxygen as opposed to air.

Evidence

Most studies show that oxygen is no better than air for chronic breathlessness in the absence of hypoxemia. There was a modest improvement in breathlessness in COPD patients with exertional desaturation in one small study. Larger, adequately powered RCTs are needed to confirm the results of the smaller studies.

What the Literature Says

Oxygen is administered for many diseases and conditions in hospitalized patients. The evidence in the literature suggests that supplemental oxygen is clearly indicated in the following instances: reversal of hypoxemia, traumatic brain injury, hemorrhagic shock, resuscitation during cardiac arrest, and CO poisoning.

Oxygen should be administered to target an SpO2 of 94–98%, except with CO poisoning, due to the inaccuracy of pulse oximetry. Patients with COPD, neuromuscular disease, and obesity who are at risk for hypercapnia should have a target SpO2 of 88–92%. Patients with ARDS should have a target SpO2 of 88–95%, due to evidence from the ARDS Network trial. Infants should have a target SpO2 of 88–94%, depending on gestational age, to prevent ROP, bronchopulmonary dysplasia, and cerebral palsy.

Summary

Oxygen is a popular drug and is often administered indiscriminately. The belief that oxygen is harmless and the attitude of “if a little is good, more is better” is common in today's healthcare environment. Severinghaus and Astrup proclaimed that “If introduced today, this gas might have difficulty getting approved by the Food and Drug Administration.”126 Priestley's words may be even truer today: “The air which nature has provided for us is as good as we deserve.”1

Footnotes

  • Correspondence: Thomas C Blakeman MSc RRT, Department of Surgery, ML 0558, University of Cincinnati, 231 Albert Sabin Way, Cincinnati OH 45267-0558. E-mail: Thomas.Blakeman{at}uc.edu.
  • Mr Blakeman presented a version of this paper at the 28th New Horizons in Respiratory Care Symposium, “The Scientific Basis for Respiratory Care,” at the AARC Congress 2012, held November 10–13, 2012, in New Orleans, Louisiana.

  • The author has disclosed no conflicts of interest.

  • Copyright © 2013 by Daedalus Enterprises

References

  1. 1.↵
    1. Grainge CP
    . Breath of life: the evolution of oxygen therapy. J R Soc Med 2004;97(10):489–493.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  2. 2.↵
    1. Heffner JE
    . The story of oxygen. Respir Care 2013;58(1):18–30.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  3. 3.↵
    1. Holtzapple GE
    . The uses and effects of oxygen gas and nux vomica in the treatment of pneumonia. New York Med J 1887;46:264–267.
    OpenUrl
  4. 4.↵
    1. Blodgett AN
    . The continuous inhalation of oxygen in cases of pneumonia otherwise fatal, and in other diseases. Boston Med Surg J 1890;123(21):481–484.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  5. 5.↵
    1. Haldane JS
    . The therapeutic administration of oxygen. BMJ 1917;1(2928):181–183.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  6. 6.↵
    Report of Societies. Oxygen therapy. BMJ 1920;1(3083):150–153.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  7. 7.↵
    1. Haldane JS
    . Respiration. London: Oxford University Press; 1922.
  8. 8.↵
    1. Small D,
    2. Duha A,
    3. Weiskopf B,
    4. Dajczman E,
    5. Laporta D,
    6. Kreisman H,
    7. et al
    . Uses and misuses of oxygen in hospitalized patients. Am J Med 1992;92(6):591–595.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. 9.↵
    1. Bateman NT,
    2. Leach RM
    . ABC of oxygen: acute oxygen therapy. BMJ 1998;317(7161):798–801.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  10. 10.↵
    American Association for Respiratory Care. Clinical Practice Guideline. Oxygen therapy for adults in the acute care facility: 2002 revision and update. Respir Care 2002;47(6):717–720.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  11. 11.↵
    1. O'Driscoll BR,
    2. Howard LS,
    3. Davison AG
    . Emergency oxygen use in adult patients: concise guidance. Clin Med 2011;11(4):372–375.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  12. 12.↵
    Western Australia Department of Health. Use of acute oxygen therapy in Western Australian hospitals. http://www.health.wa.gov.au/circularsnew/attachments/709.pdf. Accessed July 19, 2013.
  13. 13.↵
    1. Downs JB
    . Has oxygen administration delayed appropriate respiratory care? Fallacies regarding oxygen therapy. Respir Care 2003;48(6):611–620.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  14. 14.↵
    1. Douglas ME,
    2. Downs JB
    . Pulmonary function following severe acute respiratory failure and high levels of positive end-expiratory pressure. Chest 1977;71(1):18–23.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  15. 15.↵
    1. Parillo JE,
    2. Ayres SM
    1. Downs JB
    . Intensive care and the adult respiratory distress syndrome. In: Parillo JE, Ayres SM , editors. Major issues in critical care medicine. Baltimore: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 1984:149–159.
  16. 16.↵
    1. Register SD,
    2. Downs JB,
    3. Stock MC,
    4. Kirby RR
    . Is 50% oxygen harmful? Crit Care Med 1987;15(6):598–601.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  17. 17.↵
    1. Murdoch C,
    2. Gill P,
    3. Cane RD,
    4. Downs JB,
    5. Smith DB,
    6. Novitzky D
    . Cardiovascular responses and oxygenation during varied FIO2 following cardiac surgery (abstract). Anesthesiology 1994;83(3):A258.
    OpenUrl
  18. 18.↵
    1. Garner WL,
    2. Downs JB,
    3. Reilley TE,
    4. Frolicher D,
    5. Kargi A,
    6. Fabri PJ
    . The effects of hyperoxia during fulminant sepsis (abstract). Surgery 1989;105(6):747–751.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  19. 19.↵
    1. Edmark L,
    2. Kostova-Aherdan K,
    3. Enlund M,
    4. Hedenstierna G
    . Optimal oxygen concentration during induction of general anesthesia. Anesthesiology 2003;98(1):28–33.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  20. 20.↵
    1. Fu ES,
    2. Neymour R,
    3. Downs JB
    . Routine supplemental oxygen is not necessary during post-anesthesia recovery (abstract). Anesth Analg 1999;88(2S):S39.
    OpenUrl
  21. 21.↵
    World Health Organization. Chronic respiratory diseases: chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Geneva: WHO; 2010. http://www.who.int/respiratory/copd/en. Accessed July 19, 2013.
  22. 22.↵
    American Lung Association. State of lung disease in diverse communities 2010. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease COPD. http://www.lung.org/assets/documents/publications/solddc-chapters/copd.pdf. Accessed July 19, 2013.
  23. 23.↵
    1. Westlake EK,
    2. Simpson T,
    3. Kaye M
    . Carbon dioxide narcosis in emphysema. Q J Med 1955;24(94):155–173.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  24. 24.↵
    British Thoracic Society. Guidelines for the management of acute exacerbations of COPD. Thorax 1997;52(Suppl 5):S16–S21.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  25. 25.↵
    1. Denniston AK,
    2. O'Brien C,
    3. Stableforth D
    . The use of oxygen in acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a prospective audit of pre-hospital and hospital emergency management. Clin Med 2002;2(5):449–451.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  26. 26.↵
    1. Plant PK,
    2. Owen JL,
    3. Elliott MW
    . One year period prevalence study of respiratory acidosis in acute exacerbations of COPD: implications for the provision of non-invasive ventilation and oxygen administration. Thorax 2000;55(7):550–554.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  27. 27.↵
    1. Austin MA,
    2. Wills KE,
    3. Blizzard L,
    4. Walters EH,
    5. Wood-Baker R
    . Effect of high flow oxygen on mortality in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients in prehospital setting: randomised controlled trial. BMJ 2010;341:c5462.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  28. 28.↵
    1. Stofft H
    . Newborn's apparent death (1781-1806) through François Chaussier's work. Hist Sci Med 1997;31(3-4):341–349.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  29. 29.↵
    1. Raju TN
    . The Nobel chronicles. 1949: Walter Rudolf Hess (1881–1973); and Antonio Egas Moniz (1874–1955). Lancet 1999;353(9160):1281.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  30. 30.↵
    1. Robertson AF,
    2. Baker JP
    . Lessons from the past. Semin Fetal Neonatal Med 2005;10(1):23–30.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  31. 31.↵
    1. Terry TL
    . Retrolental fibroplasia in the premature infant: V. Further studies on fibroplastic overgrowth of the persistent tunica vasculosa lentis. Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc 1944;42(1):383–396.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  32. 32.↵
    1. Campbell K
    . Intensive oxygen therapy as a possible cause of retrolental fibroplasia: a clinical approach. Med J Aust 1951;2(2):48–50.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  33. 33.↵
    1. Patz A,
    2. Hoeck LE,
    3. De La Cruz E
    . Studies on the effect of high oxygen administration in retrolental fibroplasia. I. Nursery observations. Am J Ophthalmol 1952;35(9):1248–1253.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  34. 34.↵
    1. Hua SD,
    2. Chen YQ,
    3. Dong JY,
    4. Kong XY,
    5. Feng ZC
    . Screening and risk factors analysis of retinopathy of prematurity. Chin J Pediatr (Chin) 2009;47(10):757–761.
    OpenUrl
  35. 35.↵
    1. Kinsey VE,
    2. Arnold HJ,
    3. Kalina RE,
    4. Stern L,
    5. Stahlman M,
    6. Odell G,
    7. et al
    . PaO2 levels and retrolental fibroplasia: a report of the cooperative study. Pediatrics 1977;60(5):655–668.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  36. 36.↵
    1. Usher RH
    . Clinical investigation of the respiratory distress syndrome of prematurity. Interim report. NY State J Med 1961;61(1):1677–1696.
    OpenUrl
  37. 37.↵
    1. Askie LM,
    2. Henderson-Smart DJ,
    3. Irwig L,
    4. Simpson JM
    . Oxygen-saturation targets and outcomes in extremely preterm infants. N Engl J Med 2003;349(10):959–967.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  38. 38.↵
    1. Richmond S,
    2. Goldsmith JP
    . Refining the role of oxygen administration during delivery room resuscitation: what are the future goals? Semin Fetal Neonatal Med 2008;13(6):368–374.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  39. 39.↵
    1. Stenson BJ,
    2. Tarnow-Mordi WO,
    3. Darlow BA,
    4. Simes J,
    5. Jusczak E,
    6. Askie L,
    7. et al
    The BOOST II United Kingdom, Australia, and New Zealand Collaborative Groups; Stenson BJ, Tarnow-Mordi WO, Darlow BA, Simes J, Jusczak E, Askie L, et al. Oxygen saturation and outcomes in preterm infants. N Engl J Med 2013;368(22):2094–2104.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  40. 40.↵
    American Association for Respiratory Care. Clinical Practice Guideline. Neonatal and pediatric O2 delivery. Selection of an oxygen device for neonatal and pediatric patients: 2002 revision & update. Respir Care 2002;47(6):707–716.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  41. 41.↵
    American College of Surgeons. Advanced trauma life support, 6th edition. Chicago: American College of Surgeons; 1997.
  42. 42.↵
    1. McSwain NE Jr.,
    2. Frame S,
    3. Salomon JP
    , editors. Prehospital trauma life support, 5th edition. St Louis: Mosby; 2003.
  43. 43.↵
    American Heart Association. Handbook of emergency cardiovascular care for healthcare providers. Dallas: AHA; 2002.
  44. 44.↵
    1. Stockinger T,
    2. McSwain NE
    , Prehosptial supplemental oxygen in trauma patients: its efficacy and implications for military medical care. Mil Med 2004;169(8):609–612.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  45. 45.↵
    1. Barnes SL,
    2. Branson R,
    3. Gallo LA,
    4. Beck G,
    5. Johannigman JA
    . En-route care in the air: snapshot of mechanical ventilation at 37,000 feet. J Trauma 64(2):S129–S135.
  46. 46.↵
    1. Knight AR,
    2. Fry LE,
    3. Clancy RL,
    4. Pierce JD
    . Understanding the effects of oxygen administration in haemorrhagic shock. Nursing in Critical Care 2011;16(1):28–35.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  47. 47.↵
    Imminent Threat Solutions Tactical 2010 tactical combat casualty care guidelines. http://www.itstactical.com/medcom/tccc-medcom/2010-tccc-tactical-combat-casualty-care-guidelines. Accessed July 19, 2013.
  48. 48.↵
    1. Stein SC,
    2. Georgoff P,
    3. Meghan S,
    4. Mizra K,
    5. Sonnad SS
    . 150 years of treating severe traumatic brain injury: a systematic review of progress in mortality. J Neurotrauma 2010;27(7):1343–1353.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  49. 49.↵
    1. Chodobski A,
    2. Zink BJ,
    3. Szmydynger-Chodobska J
    . Blood-brain barrier pathophysiology in traumatic brain injury. Transl Stroke Res 2011;2(4):492–516.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  50. 50.↵
    1. Franschman G,
    2. Peerdeman SM,
    3. Andriessen TM,
    4. Greuter S,
    5. Too AE,
    6. Vos PE,
    7. et al
    . Effect of secondary prehospital risk factors on outcome in severe traumatic brain injury in the context of fast access to trauma care. J Trauma 2011;71(4):826–832.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  51. 51.↵
    1. Kurland D,
    2. Hong C,
    3. Aarabi B,
    4. Gerzanich V,
    5. Simard JM
    . Hemorrhagic progression of a contusion after traumatic brain injury: a review. J Neurotrauma 2012;29(1):19–31.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  52. 52.↵
    1. Chi JH,
    2. Knudson MM,
    3. Vassar MJ,
    4. McCarthy MC,
    5. Shapiro MB,
    6. Mallet S,
    7. et al
    . Prehospital hypoxia affects outcome in patients with traumatic brain injury: a prospective multicenter study. J Trauma 2006;61(5):1134–1141.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  53. 53.↵
    1. Davis DP,
    2. Meade W Jr.,
    3. Sise MJ,
    4. Kennedy F,
    5. Simon F,
    6. Tominag G
    . Both hypoxemia and extreme hyperoxemia may be detrimental in patients with severe traumatic brain injury. J Neurotrama 2009;26(2):2217–2223.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  54. 54.↵
    1. Martini RP,
    2. Deem S,
    3. Treggiari MT
    . Targeting brain tissue oxygenation in traumatic brain injury. Respir Care 2013;58(1):162–172.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  55. 55.↵
    1. Doyle RL,
    2. Szaflarski N,
    3. Modin GW,
    4. Wiener-Kronish JP,
    5. Matthay MA
    . Identification of patients with acute lung injury: predictors of mortality. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1995;152(6 Pt 1):1818–1824.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  56. 56.
    1. Suchyta MR,
    2. Clemmer TP,
    3. Elliot CG,
    4. Orme JF Jr.,
    5. Weaver LK
    . The adult respiratory distress syndrome: a report of survival and modifying factors. Chest 1992;101(4):1074–1079.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  57. 57.
    1. Sloane PJ,
    2. Gee MH,
    3. Gottlieb JE,
    4. Abertine KH,
    5. Peters SP,
    6. Burns JR,
    7. et al
    . A multicenter registry of patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome: physiology and outcome. Am Rev Respir Dis 1992;146(2):419–426.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  58. 58.↵
    1. Zilberberg MD,
    2. Epstein SK
    . Acute lung injury in the medical ICU: comorbid conditions, age, etiology, and hospital outcome. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1998;157(4 Pt 1):1159–1164.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  59. 59.↵
    The Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Network. Ventilation with lower tidal volumes as compared with traditional tidal volumes for acute lung injury and the acute respiratory distress syndrome. N Engl J Med 2001;342(18):1301–1308.
    OpenUrl
  60. 60.↵
    1. Brower RG,
    2. Ware LB,
    3. Berthiaume Y,
    4. Matthay MA
    . Treatment of ARDS. Chest 2001;120(4):347–367.
    OpenUrl
  61. 61.↵
    1. Kallet RH,
    2. Branson RD
    . Respiratory controversies in the critical care setting. Do the NIH ARDS clinical trials network PEEP/FIO2 tables provide the best evidence-based guide to balancing PEEP and FIO2 settings in adults? Respir Care 2007;52(4):461–475.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  62. 62.↵
    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Heart disease facts. http://www.cdc.gov/heartdisease/facts.htm. Accessed July 19, 2013.
  63. 63.↵
    1. Steele C
    . Severe angina pectoris relieved by oxygen inhalations. BMJ 1900;2(2083):1568.
    OpenUrl
  64. 64.↵
    1. Waring WS,
    2. Thomson AJ,
    3. Adwani SH,
    4. Rosseel AJ,
    5. Potter JF,
    6. Webb DJ,
    7. Maxwell SR
    . Cardiovascular effects of acute oxygen administration in healthy adults. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 2003;42(2):245–250.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  65. 65.
    1. Ganz W,
    2. Donoso R,
    3. Marcus H,
    4. Swan HJ
    . Coronary hemodynamics and myocardial oxygen metabolism during oxygen breathing in patients with and without coronary artery disease. Circulation 1972;45(4):763–768.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  66. 66.↵
    1. Thomson AJ,
    2. Drummond GB,
    3. Waring WS,
    4. Webb DJ,
    5. Maxwell SR
    . Effects of short-term isocapnic hyperoxia and hypoxia on cardiovascular function. J Appl Physiol 2006;101(3):809–816.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  67. 67.↵
    1. Foster GL,
    2. Casten GG,
    3. Reeves TJ
    . The effects of oxygen breathing in patients with acute myocardial infarction. Cardiovasc Res 1969;3(2):179–189.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  68. 68.↵
    1. Kenmure AC,
    2. Murdoch WR,
    3. Beattie AD,
    4. Marshall JC,
    5. Cameron AJ
    . Circulatory and metabolic effects of oxygen in myocardial infarction. BMJ 1968;4(5627):360–364.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  69. 69.↵
    1. Thomas M,
    2. Malmcrona R,
    3. Shillingford J
    . Haemodynamic effects of oxygen in patients with acute myocardial infarction. Br Heart J 1965;27(3):401–407.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  70. 70.↵
    1. McNulty PH,
    2. King N,
    3. Scott S,
    4. Hartman G,
    5. McCann J,
    6. Kozak M,
    7. et al
    . Effects of supplemental oxygen administration on coronary blood flow in patients undergoing cardiac catheterization. Am J Physiol Heart Care Physiol 2005;288(3):H1057–H1062.
    OpenUrl
  71. 71.↵
    1. Wijesinghe M,
    2. Perrin K,
    3. Ranchord A,
    4. Simmonds M,
    5. Weatheral M,
    6. Beasley R
    . Routine use of oxygen in the treatment of myocardial infarction: systematic review. Heart 2009;95(3):198–202.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  72. 72.↵
    1. Kones R
    . Oxygen therapy for acute myocardial infarction: then and now. A century of uncertainty. Am J Med 2011;124(11):1000–1005.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  73. 73.↵
    1. Burls A,
    2. Cabello JB,
    3. Emparanza JI,
    4. Bayliss S,
    5. Quinn T
    . Oxygen therapy for acute myocardial infarction: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Emerg Med J 2011;28(11):917–923.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  74. 74.↵
    1. Peberdy MA,
    2. Kaye W,
    3. Ornato JP,
    4. Larkin GL,
    5. Nadkarni V,
    6. Mancini ME,
    7. et al
    . Cardiopulmonary resuscitation of adults in the hospital: a report of 14,720 cardiac arrests from the National Registry of Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation. Resuscitation 2003;58(3):297–308.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  75. 75.↵
    1. Negovsky VA
    . The second step in resuscitation: the treatment of the “post-resuscitation disease.” Resuscitation 1972;1(1):1–7.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  76. 76.↵
    1. Kilgannon JH,
    2. Jones AE,
    3. Shapiro NI,
    4. Angelos MG,
    5. Milcarek B,
    6. Hunter K,
    7. et al
    . Association between arterial hyperoxia following resuscitation from cardiac arrest and in-hospital mortality. JAMA 2010;303(21):2165–2171.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  77. 77.↵
    1. Kilgannon JH,
    2. Jones AE,
    3. Parrillo JE,
    4. Dellinger RP,
    5. Milcarek B,
    6. Hunter K,
    7. et al
    . Relationship between supranormal oxygen tension and outcome after resuscitation from cardiac arrest. Circulation 2011;123(23):2717–2722.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  78. 78.↵
    1. Daly WJ,
    2. Bondurant S
    . Effects of oxygen breathing on the heart rate, blood pressure and cardiac index of normal men-resting, with reactive hyperemia, and after atropine. J Clin Invest 1962;41(1):126–132.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  79. 79.↵
    1. Eggen GWN,
    2. Paly HW,
    3. Leonard JJ.,
    4. Warren JV
    . Hemodynamic responses to oxygen breathing in man. J Appl Physiol 1962;17(1):75–79.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  80. 80.↵
    1. Haque WA,
    2. Boehmer J,
    3. Clemson BS,
    4. Leuenberger UA,
    5. Silber DH,
    6. Sinoway LI
    . Hemodynamic effects of supplemental oxygen administration in congestive heart failure. J Am Coll Cardiol 1996;27(2):353–357.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  81. 81.↵
    1. Adams HP Jr.,
    2. Adams RJ,
    3. Brott T,
    4. del Zoppo GJ,
    5. Furlan A,
    6. Goldstein LB,
    7. et al
    . Guidelines for the early management of patients with ischemic stroke: a scientific statement from the Stroke Council of the American Stroke Association. Stroke 2003;34(4):1056–1083.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  82. 82.↵
    1. Singhal AB
    . Oxygen therapy in stroke: past, present, and future. Int J Stroke 2006;1(4):191–200.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  83. 83.↵
    1. Rusyniak DE,
    2. Kirk MA,
    3. May JD,
    4. Kao LW,
    5. Brizendine EJ,
    6. Welch JL,
    7. et al
    . Hyperbaric oxygen therapy in acute ischemic stroke: results of the hyperbaric oxygen in acute ischemic stroke trial pilot study. Stroke 2003;34(2):571–574.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  84. 84.
    1. Anderson DC,
    2. Bottini AG,
    3. Jagiella WM,
    4. Westphal B,
    5. Ford S,
    6. Rockswold GL,
    7. Loewenson RB
    . A pilot study of hyperbaric oxygen in the treatment of human stroke. Stroke 1991;22(9):1137–1142.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  85. 85.↵
    1. Nighoghossian N,
    2. Trouillas P,
    3. Adeleine P,
    4. Salord F
    . Hyperbaric oxygen in the treatment of acute ischemic stroke. A double-blind pilot study. Stroke 1995;26(8):1369–1372.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  86. 86.↵
    1. Kety SS,
    2. Schmidt CF
    . The effects of altered tensions of carbon dioxide and oxygen on cerebral blood flow and cerebral oxygen consumption of normal young men. J Clin Invest 1984;27(4):484–492.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  87. 87.↵
    1. Mink R,
    2. Dutka A
    . Hyperbaric oxygen after global cerebral ischemia in rabbits does not promote brain lipid peroxidation. Crit Care Med 1995;23(8):1398–1404.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  88. 88.↵
    1. Mickel HS,
    2. Vaishnav YN,
    3. Kempski O,
    4. von Lubitz D,
    5. Weiss JF,
    6. Feuerstein G
    . Breathing 100% oxygen after global brain ischemia in mongolian gerbils results in increased lipid peroxidation and increased mortality. Stroke 1987;18(2):426–430.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  89. 89.↵
    1. Pancioli AM,
    2. Bullard MJ,
    3. Grulee ME,
    4. Jauch EC,
    5. Perkis DF
    . Supplemental oxygen use in ischemic stroke patients: does utilization correspond to need for oxygen therapy? Arch Intern Med 2002;162(1):49–52.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  90. 90.↵
    1. Ronning OM,
    2. Guldvog B
    . Should stroke victims routinely receive supplemental oxygen? A quasi-randomized controlled trial. Stroke 1999;30(10):2033–2037.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  91. 91.↵
    1. Bremmelgaard A,
    2. Raahave D,
    3. Beier-Holgersen R,
    4. Pedersen JV,
    5. Andersen S,
    6. Sorensen AI
    . Computer-aided surveillance of surgical infections and identification of risk factors. J Hosp Infect 1989;13(1):1–18.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  92. 92.
    1. Haley RW,
    2. Culver DH,
    3. Morgan WM,
    4. White JW,
    5. Emori TG,
    6. Hooton TM
    . Identifying patients at high risk of surgical wound infection: a simple multivariate index of patient susceptibility and wound contamination. Am J Epidemiol 1985;121(2):206–215.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  93. 93.↵
    1. Kurz A,
    2. Sessler DI,
    3. Lenhardt R
    . Perioperative normothermia to reduce the incidence of surgical-wound infection and shorten hospitalization. N Engl J Med 1996;334(19):1209–1215.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  94. 94.↵
    1. Tang R,
    2. Chen HH,
    3. Wang LY,
    4. Changchien CR,
    5. Chen JS,
    6. Hsu KC,
    7. et al
    . Risk factors for surgical site infection after elective resection of the colon and rectum: a single-center prospective study of 2809 consecutive patients. Ann Surg 2001;234(2):181–189.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  95. 95.↵
    1. Keeling NJ,
    2. Morgan MW
    . In patient and post discharge wound infections in general surgery. Ann R Coll Surg Eng 1995;77(4):245–247.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  96. 96.↵
    1. Miles AA,
    2. Miles EM,
    3. Burke J
    . The value and duration of defense reactions of the skin to the primary lodgement of bacteria. Br J Exp Pathol 1957;38(1):79–96.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  97. 97.↵
    1. Allen DB,
    2. Maguire JJ,
    3. Mahdavian M,
    4. Wicke C,
    5. Marcocci L,
    6. Scheuenstuhl H,
    7. et al
    . Wound hypoxia and acidosis limit neutrophil bacterial killing mechanisms. Arch Surg 1997;132(9):991–996.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  98. 98.↵
    1. Greif R,
    2. Ozan A,
    3. Horn EP,
    4. Kurz A,
    5. Sessler D
    . Supplemental perioperative oxygen to reduce the incidence of surgical wound infection. N Engl J Med 2000;342(3):161–167.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  99. 99.↵
    1. Mayzler O,
    2. Weksler N,
    3. Domchik S,
    4. Klein M,
    5. Mizrahi S,
    6. Gurman GM
    . Does supplemental perioperative oxygen administration reduce the incidence of wound infection in elective colorectal surgery? Minerva Anestesiol 2005;71(1-2):21–25.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  100. 100.↵
    1. Benson JM,
    2. DiPiro JT,
    3. Coleman CL,
    4. Hirsch JD,
    5. Donnigan LD,
    6. Stanfield JA,
    7. Bowden TA
    . Nausea and vomiting after abdominal surgery. Clin Pharm 1992;11(11):965–967.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  101. 101.
    1. Koivuranti M,
    2. Laara E,
    3. Snare L,
    4. Alahuhta S
    . A survey of postoperative nausea and vomiting. Anaesthesia 1997;52(5):443–449.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  102. 102.↵
    1. Quinn AC,
    2. Brown JH,
    3. Wallace PG,
    4. Asbury AJ
    . Studies in postoperative sequelae: nausea and vomiting still a problem. Anaesthesia 1994;49(1):4962–4965.
    OpenUrl
  103. 103.↵
    1. Wetchler BV
    . Postoperative nausea and vomiting in day-case surgery. Br J Anaesth 1992;69(7):33S–39S.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  104. 104.↵
    1. Greif R,
    2. Laciny S,
    3. Rapf B,
    4. Hickle RS,
    5. Sessler DI
    . Supplemental oxygen reduces the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting. Anesthesiol 1999;91(5):1246–1252.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  105. 105.↵
    1. Ghods AA,
    2. Soleimani M,
    3. Narimani M
    . Effect of postoperative supplemental oxygen on nausea and vomiting after cesarean birth. J Perianesth Nurs 2005;20(3):200–205.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  106. 106.↵
    1. Joris JL,
    2. Poth NJ,
    3. Djamadar AM,
    4. Sessler DI,
    5. Hamoir EE,
    6. Defechereux TR,
    7. et al
    . Supplemental oxygen does not reduce postoperative nausea and vomiting after thyroidectomy. Br J Anesth 2003;91(6):857–861.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  107. 107.↵
    1. Treschan TA,
    2. Zimmer C,
    3. Nass C,
    4. Stegen B,
    5. Esser J,
    6. Peters J
    . Inspired oxygen fraction of 0.8 does not attenuate postoperative nausea and vomiting after strabismus surgery. Anesthesiology 2005;103(1):6–10.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  108. 108.↵
    1. Akca O,
    2. Sessler DI
    . Supplemental oxygen reduces the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting. Minerva Anestesiol 2002;68(4):166–170.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  109. 109.↵
    1. Harris W
    . Neuritis and neuralgia. London: Oxford University; 1926.
  110. 110.↵
    1. Horton BT
    . Histaminic cephalgia. Lancet 1952;72(2):92–98.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  111. 111.↵
    1. Kudrow L
    . Response of cluster headache attacks to oxygen inhalation. Headache 1981;21(1):1–4.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  112. 112.↵
    1. Fogan L
    . Treatment of cluster headache. A double-blind comparison of oxygen vs air inhalation. Arch Neurol 1985;42(4):362–363.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  113. 113.↵
    1. Garza I
    . High-flow oxygen: a gladly received fresh look at an old but effective abortive treatment for cluster headache. Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep 2011;11(2):121–123.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  114. 114.↵
    1. Geerlings RP,
    2. Haane DY,
    3. Koehler PJ
    . Rebound following oxygen therapy in cluster headache. Cephalalgia 2011;31(10):1145–1149.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  115. 115.↵
    1. Cohen AS,
    2. Burns B,
    3. Goadsby PJ
    . High-flow oxygen for treatment of cluster headache: a randomized trial. JAMA 2009;302(22):2451–2457.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  116. 116.↵
    1. Prockop LD,
    2. Chichkova RI
    . Carbon monoxide intoxication: an updated review. J Neurol Sci 2007;262(1-2):122–130.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  117. 117.↵
    1. Haldane JB
    . Carbon monoxide as a tissue poison. Biochem J 1927;21(5):1068–1075.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  118. 118.↵
    1. Weaver LK,
    2. Hopkins RO,
    3. Larson-Lorh V,
    4. Howe S,
    5. Haberstock D
    . Double blind, controlled, prospective, randomized clinical trial (RCT) in patients with acute carbon monoxide (CO) poisoning: outcome of patients tested with normobaric oxygen or hyperbaric oxygen (HBO2), an interim report. Undersea Hyperb Med 1995;22(Suppl):14.
    OpenUrl
  119. 119.
    1. Tibbles PM,
    2. Perotta PL
    . Treatment of carbon monoxide poisoning: a critical review of human outcome studies comparing normobaric oxygen with hyperbaric oxygen. Ann Emerg Med 1994;24(2):269–276.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  120. 120.↵
    1. Weaver LK,
    2. Howe S,
    3. Hopkins R,
    4. Chan KJ
    . Carboxyhemoglobin half-life in carbon monoxide-poisoned patients treated with 100% oxygen at atmospheric pressure. Chest 2000;117(3):801–808.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  121. 121.↵
    1. Currow DC,
    2. Smith J,
    3. Davidson PM,
    4. Newton PJ,
    5. Agar MR,
    6. Abernethy AP
    . Do the trajectories of dyspnea differ in prevalence and intensity by diagnosis at the end of life? A consecutive cohort study. J Pain Symptom Manage 2010;39(4):680–690.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  122. 122.↵
    1. Bausewein C,
    2. Booth S,
    3. Gysels M,
    4. Kuhnbach R,
    5. Haberland B,
    6. Higginson IJ
    . Individual breathlessness trajectories do not match summary trajectories in advanced cancer and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: results from a longitudinal study. Palliat Med 2010;24(8):777–786.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  123. 123.↵
    1. Abernethy AP,
    2. Currow DC,
    3. Frith P,
    4. Fazekas B
    . Prescribing palliative oxygen: a clinician survey of expected benefit and patterns of use. Palliat Med 2005;19(2):168–170.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  124. 124.↵
    1. Abernethy AP,
    2. McDonald CF,
    3. Frith PA,
    4. Clark K,
    5. Herndon JE II.,
    6. Marcello J,
    7. et al
    . Effect of palliative oxygen versus room air in relief of breathlessness in patients with refractory dyspnoea: a double-blind, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2010;376(9743):784–793.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  125. 125.↵
    1. Johnson MJ,
    2. Abernethy AP,
    3. Currow DC
    . The evidence base for oxygen for chronic refractory breathlessness: issues, gaps, and a future work plan. J Pain Symptom Manage 2013;45(4):763–775.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  126. 126.↵
    1. Severinghaus JW,
    2. Astrup PB
    . The history of blood gas analysis. Eight essays. V. Oxygen, Part II,. J Clin Monit 1986;2(3):174–189.
    OpenUrlPubMed
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Respiratory Care: 58 (10)
Respiratory Care
Vol. 58, Issue 10
1 Oct 2013
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • Cover (PDF)
  • Index by author
  • Monthly Podcast

 

Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on American Association for Respiratory Care.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Evidence for Oxygen Use in the Hospitalized Patient: Is More Really the Enemy of Good?
(Your Name) has sent you a message from American Association for Respiratory Care
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the American Association for Respiratory Care web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Evidence for Oxygen Use in the Hospitalized Patient: Is More Really the Enemy of Good?
Thomas C Blakeman
Respiratory Care Oct 2013, 58 (10) 1679-1693; DOI: 10.4187/respcare.02677

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Share
Evidence for Oxygen Use in the Hospitalized Patient: Is More Really the Enemy of Good?
Thomas C Blakeman
Respiratory Care Oct 2013, 58 (10) 1679-1693; DOI: 10.4187/respcare.02677
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Introduction
    • Early Oxygen Use
    • Modern Oxygen Therapy
    • Indications for Oxygen Therapy
    • Oxygen Myths
    • Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
    • Infants/Neonates
    • Trauma
    • ARDS
    • Myocardial Infarction
    • Cardiac Arrest
    • Congestive Heart Failure
    • Stroke
    • Wound Infection
    • Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting
    • Cluster Headache
    • Carbon Monoxide Poisoning
    • Breathlessness
    • What the Literature Says
    • Summary
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF

Related Articles

Cited By...

Keywords

  • oxygen therapy
  • normoxia
  • hypoxemia
  • hyperoxemia
  • oxygen efficacy
  • oxygen safety

Info For

  • Subscribers
  • Institutions
  • Advertisers

About Us

  • About the Journal
  • Editorial Board
  • Reprints/Permissions

AARC

  • Membership
  • Meetings
  • Clinical Practice Guidelines

More

  • Contact Us
  • RSS
American Association for Respiratory Care

Print ISSN: 0020-1324        Online ISSN: 1943-3654

© Daedalus Enterprises, Inc.

Powered by HighWire