Author
Listed:
- Naomi E Hammond
- Colman Taylor
- Simon Finfer
- Flavia R Machado
- YouZhong An
- Laurent Billot
- Frank Bloos
- Fernando Bozza
- Alexandre Biasi Cavalcanti
- Maryam Correa
- Bin Du
- Peter B Hjortrup
- Yang Li
- Lauralyn McIntryre
- Manoj Saxena
- Frédérique Schortgen
- Nicola R Watts
- John Myburgh
- for the Fluid-TRIPS and Fluidos Investigators
- The George Institute for Global Health, The ANZICS Clinical Trials Group, BRICNet, and the REVA research Network
Abstract
Background: In 2007, the Saline versus Albumin Fluid Evaluation—Translation of Research Into Practice Study (SAFE-TRIPS) reported that 0.9% sodium chloride (saline) and hydroxyethyl starch (HES) were the most commonly used resuscitation fluids in intensive care unit (ICU) patients. Evidence has emerged since 2007 that these fluids are associated with adverse patient-centred outcomes. Based on the published evidence since 2007, we sought to determine the current type of fluid resuscitation used in clinical practice and the predictors of fluid choice and determine whether these have changed between 2007 and 2014. Methods: In 2014, an international, cross-sectional study was conducted (Fluid-TRIPS) to document current patterns of intravenous resuscitation fluid use and determine factors associated with fluid choice. We examined univariate and multivariate associations between patients and prescriber characteristics, geographical region and fluid type. Additionally, we report secular trends of resuscitation fluid use in a cohort of ICUs that participated in both the 2007 and 2014 studies. Regression analysis were conducted to determine changes in the administration of crystalloid or colloid between 2007 and 2014. Findings: In 2014, a total of 426 ICUs in 27 countries participated. Over the 24 hour study day, 1456/6707 (21.7%) patients received resuscitation fluid during 2716 resuscitation episodes. Crystalloids were administered to 1227/1456 (84.3%) patients during 2208/2716 (81.3%) episodes and colloids to 394/1456 (27.1%) patients during 581/2716 (21.4%) episodes. In multivariate analyses, practice significantly varied between geographical regions. Additionally, patients with a traumatic brain injury were less likely to receive colloid when compared to patients with no trauma (adjusted OR 0.24; 95% CI 0.1 to 0.62; p = 0.003). Patients in the ICU for one or more days where more likely to receive colloid compared to patients in the ICU on their admission date (adjusted OR 1.75; 95% CI 1.27 to 2.41; p =
Suggested Citation
Naomi E Hammond & Colman Taylor & Simon Finfer & Flavia R Machado & YouZhong An & Laurent Billot & Frank Bloos & Fernando Bozza & Alexandre Biasi Cavalcanti & Maryam Correa & Bin Du & Peter B Hjortrup, 2017.
"Patterns of intravenous fluid resuscitation use in adult intensive care patients between 2007 and 2014: An international cross-sectional study,"
PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(5), pages 1-21, May.
Handle:
RePEc:plo:pone00:0176292
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0176292
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0176292. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.