I killed my COPD'r with an oxygen bottle!

[CAOX3]

Does it matter? What we're comparing is death rates in people who were initially in respiratory distress. One group received high-concentration oxygen, the other received titrated oxygen PRN. The group who got "balls to the wall" O2 died at a higher rate. Other complications should have occurred at the same rate between the two sample groups.

This is not the old "hypoxic drive" argument. This is a recognition that oxygen is NOT a benign treatment as has been taught for years. We're just now starting to figure out how harmful O2 therapy can be. O2 is indeed a medication, and should be treated as such. "More is better" is not the philosophy used with pressors, why is it with O2?

Who said anything about oxygen being benign? My earlier post stated we titrate oxygen to stability and comfort.

I use oxygen when indicated. I also don't withhold it from a hypoxic patient. Its one study who knows what their objective was.

 

[jrm818]

Who said anything about oxygen being benign? My earlier post stated we titrate oxygen to stability and comfort.

I use oxygen when indicated. I also don't withhold it from a hypoxic patient. Its one study who knows what their objective was.

I think some of the usefulness of this study is that it raises questions about how you interpret "stability" "comfort" or "hypoxia" in COPD patients. If "comfort" = "0 dyspnea" and "non-hypoxic" = "98% SpO2," you (general you, not you you) may still be doing your patients a disservice by treating with oxygen until those goals are met.

Keep in mind that disservice here may mean as many as 1 in 14 patients treated this way dying. That strikes me as huge, and I'm actually sort of surprised there wasn't more response to this finding from the community at large here.

As to "objectives," are you suggesting the authors have an ulterior motive that lends some bias to the study?