EVIDENCE: show me evidence oxygen as being given by EMS is harming people.

mycrofft

Still crazy but elsewhere
Messages
11,322
Reaction score
48
Points
48
Not debating whether it is often unnecessary or not utilized in a clinically proper or professional manner, but please someone show me the heaps of bodies due to current, often overzealous oxygen administration?




(If you don't recognize this rant, I'm this way about latex, immunization-induced autism, and nut allergies, plus others).
 
I would like to see that myself. Nut allergies..lol, when I was a kid that was unheard of.

immunization-induced autism, this has already been proven false, in fact the person writing the paper was found to have falsified data.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I doubt there are many studies focusing on pre-hospital care, because well, there just aren't very many studies involving EMS. However, there are plenty of studies covering things that happen in the hospital that we also do. Namely hyperoxygenation in cardiac arrest patients.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22971589
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20516417
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21385416
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21606393

There were more, but they either used non-human subjects or had no abstracts.
 
I am allergic to nuts, idiots, psychopaths and most EMS personnel.
 
I don't think over oxygenating a patient in the pre hospital setting is going to do major harm. Most of the complications I have heard about occur in the hospital when the patient has been on oxygen for over 24 hours. Not saying there isn't the potential for harm in pre-hospital.

I have learned by being in the field that we don't provide oxygen as much as the book says. Of all the patients I have transported in my young EMS career, only a handfull have needed oxygen.

The second lesson I have learned is just because you give oxygen doesn't mean you can't stop if patient no longer needs it.
 
There is ample evidence the high FiO2 is harmful. Oxygen is toxic. It leads to or exacerbates ARDS and VILI. It causes absorption atelectasis, hyaline membrane formation, pulmonary oedema and pulmonary fibrosis. It alters immune response, causes inflammation and encourages the growth of pseudomonas species. And that's just in ventilated patients. Supernormal O2 levels are associated with worsening of re-perfusion injury, such as in the post arrest patient, and there is a very plausible link (being investigated currently) between O2 and poor outcome in MI.

I'm sure there are a raft of deleterious effects to be seen in other systems as well. Maybe Vene can fill us in a bit more, this is just crap I can drag out of my feeble little brain post gym.

The real question is why does EMS insist on giving everyone a PaO2 of 300, and why do we think anyone benefits from this?
 
http://www.bmj.com/content/341/bmj.c5462.full

Effect of high flow oxygen on mortality in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients in prehospital setting: randomised controlled trial

Results In an intention to treat analysis, the risk of death was significantly lower in the titrated oxygen arm compared with the high flow oxygen arm for all patients (high flow oxygen n=226; titrated oxygen n=179) and for the subgroup of patients with confirmed chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (high flow n=117; titrated n=97)
 
Show me it helps.

Produce a study that shows prehospital oxygen administration improves outcomes, decreases morbitiy and mortality or shortens ICU or hospital admission.

OK, I have typed what amounts to books on that pathophys of oxygen administration. The first thing the Dean of my medical school ever said to me when she found out I was a paramedic was "please don't put high flow oxygen on everyone it really hurts."

I have read about negative effects of oxygen administration in more than 5 medical texts. (all must cite their sources and it takes about 5 years after something is proven to even appear in a textbook. Even longer to appear as standard practice.)

Not aiming my comments directly at Mycrofft, but this type of argument is used by every old guy who doesn't want to change practice.

They are comfortable with what they are doing. They simply don't want to change. They also need the mental security that they were helping in the past and not harming.

These same people who don't realize or admit their treatments were based on some guy they respected comming up with "an idea." They had no scientific evidence supporting them. They performed no studies. Now more than 2 or more decades later many of the studies being done showed they didn't work or harmed.

Still they demand more and more evidence without offering any themselves.

Despite the whole medical community learning more in the last 16 years now than in the rest of history combined. (An interesting piece of trivia. In the 1600s Dr. William Harvey described and demonstrated how circulation worked in the human body. Until popular acceptance, which was some years later, the world medical community was still using the teaching of the circulatory system as described by Galen between 130 and 201 AD) they continue to demand absolutely impossible burdons of evidence to refute their opinions. While claiming that the opinions of experts of today are invalid because they are just educated opinions.

The argument for the ill effects of prehospital oxygen is outright stupid.

It is akin to shooting somebody, leaving the scene and claiming they didn't die of the gunshot wound, they died of hemorrhage which the shooter had nothing to do with.

When an EMS treatment shoots somebody, EMS doesn't see the result. They leave the scene. But the event doesn't end there for the patient. The damage done or exacerbated by these "treatments" can no tonly increase mobidity, mortality, and length of hospital stay, they can cause a long term decrease in function and quality of life even in populations that are healthy.

As I said before, if kill off 0.5 or 1% of somebody's lung function today, with the cumulative loss of function over a life span, you could take years from somebody and increase the cost of their medical care sooner and for longer.

As was expertly pointed out in an earlier reply, in an actual acute critical patient, especially those in shock (of any etiology) oxygen can lead to fatal pulmonary pathophysiology.

It is also implicated in renal failure as well as liver injury by similar but only slightly different mechanisms.

As anyone who deals with intensive care or surgery can tell you, when you lose the kidneys, the progression to the end is quick. Even starting dialysis only occasionally changes the outcome.

So just like eating a Big Mac didn't cause your MI. It did set off a chain of events that worsened your life over time until your acute permanant disability or end.

It probably didn't do it the exact moment you were sitting there eating it either.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't understand why we cant all just agree that more often than not, our administration of O2 is outright ridiculous.

Stroke - 15 liters
MI - 15 liters
Abdominal pain - 15 liters
Trauma - crank it to the max! Stat!

The only time in my eyes it makes sense to administer oxygen is in the presence of or suspicion of pulmonary distress or decreased oxygenation/respiration/ventilation.

What does oxygen do for me in ANY of the above conditions if the patient is adequately breathing and sustaining oxygenation?

A person has massive bleeding? They are losing blood volume and heme. If they are breathing, they have just as much oxygen as before and without surgical intervention you won't fix that. You are giving oxygen for the sake of giving it.

Same goes for stroke and MI. If its ischemic in nature, more oxygen isn't going to magically break down a clot. If you want to tittered to 100% SpO2, fine. But that is probably achieved most times with a NC at 2-6lpm.

Just because I don't personally see the damage doesn't mean it may not be there or set in later. Scar tissue doesn't just instantly form...
 
I don't understand why we cant all just agree that more often than not, our administration of O2 is outright ridiculous.

Stroke - 15 liters
MI - 15 liters
Abdominal pain - 15 liters
Trauma - crank it to the max! Stat!

The only time in my eyes it makes sense to administer oxygen is in the presence of or suspicion of pulmonary distress or decreased oxygenation/respiration/ventilation.

What does oxygen do for me in ANY of the above conditions if the patient is adequately breathing and sustaining oxygenation?

A person has massive bleeding? They are losing blood volume and heme. If they are breathing, they have just as much oxygen as before and without surgical intervention you won't fix that. You are giving oxygen for the sake of giving it.

Same goes for stroke and MI. If its ischemic in nature, more oxygen isn't going to magically break down a clot. If you want to tittered to 100% SpO2, fine. But that is probably achieved most times with a NC at 2-6lpm.

Just because I don't personally see the damage doesn't mean it may not be there or set in later. Scar tissue doesn't just instantly form...

But if your protocols call for it and you don't provide it....

:unsure:
 
But if your protocols call for it and you don't provide it....

:unsure:

Then call medical control and ask to withold it until they get so sick of taking the call they change the protocol.

Most protocols I have seen have a caviat somewhere about witholding various therapy based on clinical findings.

If your protocols say to immobilize a given patient and you find one with severe CHF are you planning to strap them in a supine position even if they can't breath that way?
 
But if your protocols call for it and you don't provide it....

:unsure:

Then you are no better than the guy making sandwiches following a list of steps at Subway.

You wanna be looked at and treated as a CLINICIAN and real member of the medical community, than prove that you are worthy by having knowledge and understanding.

If you have the knowledge to back your argument, you will remain in calm waters.
 
Not aiming my comments directly at Mycrofft, but this type of argument is used by every old guy who doesn't want to change practice.

They are comfortable with what they are doing. They simply don't want to change. They also need the mental security that they were helping in the past and not harming.

These same people who don't realize or admit their treatments were based on some guy they respected comming up with "an idea." They had no scientific evidence supporting them. They performed no studies. Now more than 2 or more decades later many of the studies being done showed they didn't work or harmed.

Still they demand more and more evidence without offering any themselves.
I must respectfully disagree with you.

When you are only taught one thing, and that one thing is consistently taught in classes today, by EMT-Instructors (and paramedics, lawyers, doctors, RTs, etc), and not contraindicated by medical directors everywhere (you know, those doctor peoples), and the state protocols say to give oxygen (which are written or approved by doctors), how can they think anything differently? Not only that, but all that stuff makes up the "standard of care" and if you don't follow it, you will suffer the wrath, regardless of if a negative outcome occurs or not.

we backboard people. why? because the books says so. we NRB everyone. why? because the book tells us to.

a field provider going against standard practice isn't changing anything. in fact, if something happens, and the patient dies, the provider will be hung out to dry because they failed to follow protocol, despite being academically correct. it's just one lone providing doing what he wants.

Changes start at the top: medical directors change policies at the agency level, state protocols change at the state level, and the text book authors change at the education level. than it trickles down to the newbies, who read it when they are in EMT class, the supervisors pass on new protocols to their subordinates, and any one who fails to see that, can look to the state to see what the state protocols say you should be doing.
 
Changes start at the top: medical directors change policies at the agency level, state protocols change at the state level, and the text book authors change at the education level. than it trickles down to the newbies, who read it when they are in EMT class, the supervisors pass on new protocols to their subordinates, and any one who fails to see that, can look to the state to see what the state protocols say you should be doing.

I must respectfully disagree with you on this point.

Changes in EMS ultimately need to change at the top, but they need to start by changing at the bottom.

Until EMS providers evolve past the standard of middle school vocational level education, those "doctor people" at the top aren't going to be comfortable changing a damn thing. And, I don't blame them.

The reason the protocols are written how they are instead of "when indicated" or at the providers discretion is because the lowest common denominator has proven itself to be incapable of critical thinking and educated thought process. If we leave it up to undereducated incompetent EMS persons, they will take the easy route and never do it because they don't know when t is truly indicated. They are more comfortable with you giving it to everyone than not giving it when it may truly be a necessity because you didn't know any better.

This is why EMS sucks. Because our standards are a god damn joke.
 
Then call medical control and ask to withold it until they get so sick of taking the call they change the protocol.

Most protocols I have seen have a caviat somewhere about witholding various therapy based on clinical findings.

If your protocols say to immobilize a given patient and you find one with severe CHF are you planning to strap them in a supine position even if they can't breath that way?

A good and reasonable response, (and, btw, pretty much in line with my thinking.) Thanks.

Then you are no better than the guy making sandwiches following a list of steps at Subway.

You wanna be looked at and treated as a CLINICIAN and real member of the medical community, than prove that you are worthy by having knowledge and understanding.

If you have the knowledge to back your argument, you will remain in calm waters.

An arrogant and condescending response that is not at all helpful.
 
A good and reasonable response, (and, btw, pretty much in line with my thinking.) Thanks.



An arrogant and condescending response that is not at all helpful.

Truth hurts. Sorry.
 
Never mind. Not worth the drama.:D
 
Last edited by a moderator:
That doesn't exactly make sense other than stating that some people are bad at performing IVs. Which is true. Not sure what you are going for on that one.

Doctors and nurses don't view EMS as a service of "ambulance drivers" for no reason.

When you bring your patient into the ER on O2, the first thing they do is take the O2 mask off. (same thing I do when I show up to a job with BLS)

The reason is to establish a baseline, yes, but 9/10 that mask doesn't get put back on.

It's actually pretty rare to see a patient on a NRB in the ER in NYC. Titrated NC, sure. Titration being the key term here... Many people I work with don't even know what that word means.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Nymedic

1. Then you are no better than the guy making sandwiches following a list of steps at Subway.

2. You wanna be looked at and treated as a CLINICIAN and real member of the medical community, than prove that you are worthy by having knowledge and understanding.

3. If you have the knowledge to back your argument, you will remain in calm waters.

#2: But be very very careful that you really are a clincian before you decide to act like one...say by going to school and getting a degree then pass some boards, for instance?:cool:

#1: THAT was the original intent of EMT-Ambulance (now "Basic"), get as many TECHNICALLY trained people out there and everywhere by using rules and protocols through medical control of some sort.

#3: Yes, if your medical control or supervisor doesn't fire you for making too many exceptions, no matter how well-grounded in EMTLIFE info they are.;)
 
Back
Top