Back to Search
Start Over
A randomised controlled trial and cost-effectiveness analysis of high-frequency oscillatory ventilation against conventional artificial ventilation for adults with acute respiratory distress syndrome. The OSCAR (OSCillation in ARDS) study
- Source :
- Health Technology Assessment, Vol 19, Iss 23 (2015)
- Publication Year :
- 2015
- Publisher :
- NIHR Journals Library, 2015.
-
Abstract
- Background: Patients with the acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) require artificial ventilation but this treatment may produce secondary lung damage. High-frequency oscillatory ventilation (HFOV) may reduce this damage. Objectives: To determine the clinical benefit and cost-effectiveness of HFOV in patients with ARDS compared with standard mechanical ventilation. Design: A parallel, randomised, unblinded clinical trial. Setting: UK intensive care units. Participants: Mechanically ventilated patients with a partial pressure of oxygen in arterial blood/fractional concentration of inspired oxygen (P : F) ratio of 26.7 kPa (200 mmHg) or less and an expected duration of ventilation of at least 2 days at recruitment. Interventions: Treatment arm HFOV using a Novalung R100® ventilator (Metran Co. Ltd, Saitama, Japan) ventilator until the start of weaning. Control arm Conventional mechanical ventilation using the devices available in the participating centres. Main outcome measures: The primary clinical outcome was all-cause mortality at 30 days after randomisation. The primary health economic outcome was the cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. Results: One hundred and sixty-six of 398 patients (41.7%) randomised to the HFOV group and 163 of 397 patients (41.1%) randomised to the conventional mechanical ventilation group died within 30 days of randomisation (p = 0.85), for an absolute difference of 0.6% [95% confidence interval (CI) −6.1% to 7.5%]. After adjustment for study centre, sex, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score, and the initial P : F ratio, the odds ratio for survival in the conventional ventilation group was 1.03 (95% CI 0.75 to 1.40; p = 0.87 logistic regression). Survival analysis showed no difference in the probability of survival up to 12 months after randomisation. The average QALY at 1 year in the HFOV group was 0.302 compared to 0.246. This gives an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for the cost to society per QALY of £88,790 and an ICER for the cost to the NHS per QALY of £78,260. Conclusions: The use of HFOV had no effect on 30-day mortality in adult patients undergoing mechanical ventilation for ARDS and no economic advantage. We suggest that further research into avoiding ventilator-induced lung injury should concentrate on ventilatory strategies other than HFOV. Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN10416500. Funding: This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 19, No. 23. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
Details
- Language :
- English
- ISSN :
- 13665278 and 20464924
- Volume :
- 19
- Issue :
- 23
- Database :
- Directory of Open Access Journals
- Journal :
- Health Technology Assessment
- Publication Type :
- Academic Journal
- Accession number :
- edsdoj.8cba0241774d40e1a59a717088cb957e
- Document Type :
- article
- Full Text :
- https://doi.org/10.3310/hta19230