ICONIC study—conservative versus conventional oxygenation targets in intensive care patients: study protocol for a randomized clinical trial

Background

Oxygen therapy is a widely used intervention in acutely ill patients in the intensive care unit (ICU). It is established that not only hypoxia, but also prolonged hyperoxia is associated with poor patient-centered outcomes. Nevertheless, a fundamental knowledge gap remains regarding optimal oxygenation for critically ill patients. In this randomized clinical trial, we aim to compare ventilation that uses conservative oxygenation targets with ventilation that uses conventional oxygen targets with respect to mortality in ICU patients.

Methods

The “ConservatIve versus CONventional oxygenation targets in Intensive Care patients” trial (ICONIC) is an investigator-initiated, international, multicenter, randomized clinical two-arm trial in ventilated adult ICU patients. The ICONIC trial will run in multiple ICUs in The Netherlands and Italy to enroll 1512 ventilated patients. ICU patients with an expected mechanical ventilation time of more than 24 h are randomized to a ventilation strategy that uses conservative (PaO₂ 55–80 mmHg (7.3–10.7 kPa)) or conventional (PaO₂ 110–150 mmHg (14.7–20 kPa)) oxygenation targets. The primary endpoint is 28-day mortality. Secondary endpoints are ventilator-free days at day 28, ICU mortality, in-hospital mortality, 90-day mortality, ICU- and hospital length of stay, ischemic events, quality of life, and patient opinion of research and consent in the emergency setting.

Discussion

The ICONIC trial is expected to provide evidence on the effects of conservative versus conventional oxygenation targets in the ICU population. This study may guide targeted oxygen therapy in the future.

Trial registration

Trialregister.nl NTR7376. Registered on 20 July, 2018.

Attitudes of Dutch intensive care unit clinicians towards oxygen therapy

BACKGROUND

Over the last decade, there has been an increasing awareness for the potential harm of the administration of too much oxygen. We aimed to describe self-reported attitudes towards oxygen therapy by clinicians from a large representative sample of intensive care units (ICUs) in the Netherlands.

METHODS

In April 2019, 36 ICUs in the Netherlands were approached and asked to send out a questionnaire (59 questions) to their nursing and medical staff (ICU clinicians) eliciting self-reported behaviour and attitudes towards oxygen therapy in general and in specific ICU case scenarios.

RESULTS

In total, 1361 ICU clinicians (71% nurses, 24% physicians) from 28 ICUs returned the questionnaire. Of responding ICU clinicians, 64% considered oxygen-induced lung injury to be a major concern. The majority of respondents considered a partial pressure of oxygen (PaO2) of 6-10 kPa (45-75 mmHg) and an arterial saturation (SaO2) of 85-90% as acceptable for 15 minutes, and a PaO2 7-10 kPa (53-75 mmHg) and SaO2 90-95% as acceptable for 24-48 hours in an acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) patient. In most case scenarios, respondents reported not to change the fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2) if SaO2 was 90-95% or PaO2 was 12 kPa (90 mmHg).

CONCLUSION

A representative sample of ICU clinicians from the Netherlands were concerned about oxygen-induced lung injury, and reported that they preferred PaO2 and SaO2 targets in the lower physiological range and would adjust ventilation settings accordingly.