Conservative versus liberal oxygenation targets in critically ill children: the randomised multiple-centre pilot Oxy-PICU trial

Conservative versus liberal oxygenation targets in critically ill children: the randomised... Background: Oxygen saturation monitoring for children receiving respiratory support is standard worldwide. No ran- domised clinical trials have compared peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO ) targets for critically ill children. The harm of interventions to raise SpO to > 94% may exceed their benefits. Methods: We undertook an open, parallel-group randomised trial of children > 38 weeks completed gestation and < 16 years of age receiving invasive or non-invasive respiratory support and supplemental oxygen who were admitted urgently to one of three paediatric intensive care units. A ‘research without prior consent’ approach was employed. Children were randomly assigned to a liberal oxygenation group (SpO targets > 94%) or a conservative oxygenation group (SpO = 88–92% inclusive). Outcomes were measures of feasibility: recruitment rate, protocol adherence and acceptability, between-group separation of SpO and safety. The Oxy-PICU trial was registered before recruitment: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT03040570. Results: A total of 159 children met the inclusion criteria, of whom 119 (75%) were randomised between April and July 2017, representing a rate of 10 patients per month per site. The mean time to randomisation from first contact with an intensive care team was 1.9 (SD 2.2) h. Consent to continue in the study was obtained http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Intensive Care Medicine Springer Journals

Conservative versus liberal oxygenation targets in critically ill children: the randomised multiple-centre pilot Oxy-PICU trial

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer_journal/conservative-versus-liberal-oxygenation-targets-in-critically-ill-0b7aCBZRYC
Publisher
Springer Journals
Copyright
Copyright © 2018 by Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature and ESICM
Subject
Medicine & Public Health; Intensive / Critical Care Medicine; Anesthesiology; Emergency Medicine; Pneumology/Respiratory System; Pain Medicine; Pediatrics
ISSN
0342-4642
eISSN
1432-1238
D.O.I.
10.1007/s00134-018-5232-7
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Background: Oxygen saturation monitoring for children receiving respiratory support is standard worldwide. No ran- domised clinical trials have compared peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO ) targets for critically ill children. The harm of interventions to raise SpO to > 94% may exceed their benefits. Methods: We undertook an open, parallel-group randomised trial of children > 38 weeks completed gestation and < 16 years of age receiving invasive or non-invasive respiratory support and supplemental oxygen who were admitted urgently to one of three paediatric intensive care units. A ‘research without prior consent’ approach was employed. Children were randomly assigned to a liberal oxygenation group (SpO targets > 94%) or a conservative oxygenation group (SpO = 88–92% inclusive). Outcomes were measures of feasibility: recruitment rate, protocol adherence and acceptability, between-group separation of SpO and safety. The Oxy-PICU trial was registered before recruitment: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT03040570. Results: A total of 159 children met the inclusion criteria, of whom 119 (75%) were randomised between April and July 2017, representing a rate of 10 patients per month per site. The mean time to randomisation from first contact with an intensive care team was 1.9 (SD 2.2) h. Consent to continue in the study was obtained

Journal

Intensive Care MedicineSpringer Journals

Published: Jun 4, 2018

References

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create lists to
organize your research

Export lists, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off