Patients' and nurses' perspectives on oxygen therapy: a qualitative study.

School of Nursing, Deakin University, Epworth Eastern Hospital, Victoria, Australia.
Journal of Advanced Nursing (Impact Factor: 1.69). 04/2009; 65(3):634-41. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2008.04933.x
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT This paper is a report of a study to describe patients' and nurses' perspectives on oxygen therapy.
Failure to correct significant hypoxaemia may result in cardiac arrest, need for mechanical ventilation or death. Nurses frequently make clinical decisions about the selection and management of low-flow oxygen therapy devices. Better understanding of patients' and nurses' experiences of oxygen therapy could inform clinical decisions about oxygen administration using low-flow devices.
Face-to-face interviews with a convenience sample of 37 adult patients (17 cardio-thoracic: 20 medical surgical) and 25 intensive care unit nurses were conducted from February 2007 to September 2007. Interviews were audio-taped, transcribed verbatim and then analysed using a thematic analysis approach.
The patients identified three key factors that underpinned their compliance with oxygen therapy: (i) device comfort; (ii) ability to maintain activities of daily living; and (iii) therapeutic effect. The nurses identified factors, such as: (i) therapeutic effect, (ii) issues associated with compliance, (iii) strategies to optimize compliance, (iv) familiarity with device, (v) triggers for changing oxygen therapy devices, as being key to the effective management of oxygen therapy.
Differences between the patients' and nurses' perspective of oxygen therapy illustrate the variety of factors that impact on effective oxygen administration. Further research should seek to provide a further in-depth understanding of the current oxygen administration practices of nurses and the patient factors that enhance or hinder effectiveness of oxygen therapy. Detailed information about nurse and patient factors that influence oxygen therapy will inform a sound evidence base for nurses' oxygen administration decisions.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Oxygen is one of the commonest health-care interventions worldwide. This might suggest that health-care professionals (HCPs) would be knowledgeable and familiar with its uses and limitations. Yet it is apparent, through clinical audit, that oxygen is probably misunderstood by many HCPs. The aim of this critical interpretive synthesis (CIS) is to explore qualitative and quantitative literature in relation to HCPs beliefs and perceptions of oxygen therapy. A systematic search in Medline, Cinahl, Embase, British Nursing Index and PsychInfo using search terms, such as, oxygen therapy, chronic respiratory disease, HCPs and perceptions yielded 1514 studies of which 12 contained data relevant to the review question. Two reviewers independently screened the articles for eligibility against inclusion and exclusion criteria, and data were selected and synthesized with an integrative and interpretive approach using CIS. This allowed diverse empirical evidence to be synthesized to develop existing and new interpretations of data.Three synthetic constructs were interpreted from the available literature, namely, oxygen for symptom relief, levels of knowledge and understanding and oxygen as a therapy for HCPs. The literature alludes to deep-seated beliefs that exist. In order to enhance practice, these beliefs and cultures need to be challenged. Further research is needed to explore HCPs' perceptions of oxygen therapy in order to inform the seemingly resistant adoption of evidence based practice in relation to oxygen. © The Author(s) 2014.
    Chronic Respiratory Disease 12/2014; 12(1). DOI:10.1177/1479972314562408 · 2.31 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Critical care nurses frequently and independently manage oxygen therapy. Despite the importance of oxygen therapy, there is limited evidence to inform or support critical care nurses' oxygen therapy practices. To establish if there is variability in oxygen therapy practices of critical care nurses and examine the degree of variability. On-line questionnaire of ACCCN members between April and June 2010. The response rate was 36% (542/1523 critical care nurses). Overall, 378 (70%) respondents practiced in metropolitan critical care units; 278 (51%) had ≥14 years of specialty practice. In response to falling SpO(2), 8.9% of nurses would never escalate oxygen therapy without a doctor's request, and 51% of nurses would not routinely escalate oxygen therapy in the absence of medical orders. Only 56% of nurses reported always increasing FiO(2) prior to endotracheal suctioning. In mechanically ventilated patients, 33% of nurses believed oxygen toxicity was a greater threat to lung injury than barotrauma. More than >60% of respondents reported a tolerance for a stable SpO(2) of 90%. Nurses in rural critical care units were less likely to independently titrate oxygen to their own target SpO(2), but more likely to independently treat a falling SpO(2) with higher FiO(2). Critical care nurses varied in their self-reported oxygen therapy practices justifying observational and interventional studies aimed at improving oxygen therapy for critically ill patients.
    Australian Critical Care 06/2011; 25(1):23-30. DOI:10.1016/j.aucc.2011.05.001 · 1.27 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Dyspnea is a common symptom in many advanced malignant and non-malignant diseases and often is refractory to the usual therapies. In such circumstances palliative care approaches are necessary and among them palliative care oxygen therapy can be applied although currently its effectiveness is rather uncertain. Palliative oxygen therapy can be given on either continuous basis or on demand. Often the continuous palliative oxygen therapy is seen as long-term oxygen therapy although their aims are rather different. Palliative oxygen therapy was evaluated in populations with mixed underlying diseases, with outcome measures not only the most appropriate for the setting and therefore these limitations might have influenced the overall perceived therapeutic benefit. Therefore an evaluation of this method in subsets defined based on the etiology and pathogenic mechanisms and with appropriate outcome measures would help to better define the criteria for its indication and would increase its acceptability.
    Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research 04/2014; DOI:10.1586/14737167.2014.906308 · 1.87 Impact Factor


Available from
Jun 4, 2014