Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28498856›Full record

ArticlePloS one2017

Patterns of intravenous fluid resuscitation use in adult intensive care patients between 2007 and 2014: An international cross-sectional study.

Naomi E Hammond, Colman Taylor, Simon Finfer, Flavia R Machado, YouZhong An, Laurent Billot, Frank Bloos, Fernando Bozza, Alexandre Biasi Cavalcanti, Maryam Correa and 10 more

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02002013 (The Fluid Translation of Research Into Practice Study), which is not on this map. Cited by 51 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
51citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
10.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT02002013 completednot on this map

The Fluid Translation of Research Into Practice Study (Fluid-TRIPS): An International Cross-Sectional Survey of Fluid Resuscitation Practice

TypeobservationalSponsorThe George Institute for Global Health, AustraliaRan2014 to 2014Enrolled2,000ConditionsCritical Care, Fluid Resuscitation
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

51 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 135 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Balanced Crystalloids versus Saline in Sepsis. A Secondary Analysis of the SMART Clinical Trial.American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine · 2019
    Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Balanced Crystalloids versus Saline in Critically Ill Adults.The New England journal of medicine · 2018
    Trial
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

20 authors at 12 institutions in 7 countries.

Naomi E HammondCritical Care and Trauma Division, The George Institute for Global Health, Sydney, Australia.
Colman TaylorCritical Care and Trauma Division, The George Institute for Global Health, Sydney, Australia.
Simon FinferCritical Care and Trauma Division, The George Institute for Global Health, Sydney, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2785-5864
Flavia R MachadoAnesthesiology, Pain and Intensive Care Department, Federal University of Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2356-4867
YouZhong AnDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing, China.
Laurent BillotSydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4975-9793
Frank BloosDepartment of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Jena University Hospital, Jena, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0767-7941
Fernando BozzaD'Or Institute for Research and Education, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4878-0256
Alexandre Biasi CavalcantiResearch Institute, Hospital do Coração, São Paulo, Brazil.
Maryam CorreaCritical Care and Trauma Division, The George Institute for Global Health, Sydney, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4591-4052
Bin DuMedical Intensive Care Unit, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Beijing, China.
Peter B HjortrupDepartment of Intensive Care, Copenhagen University Hospital, Rigshospitalet, Denmark.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3847-3247
Yang LiCritical Care and Trauma Division, The George Institute for Global Health, Sydney, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7665-8640
Lauralyn McIntryreDepartment of Medicine (Critical Care), The Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada.
Manoj SaxenaCritical Care and Trauma Division, The George Institute for Global Health, Sydney, Australia.
Frédérique SchortgenAssistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Réanimation Médicale Groupe Hospitalier Henri Mondor, Créteil, France.
Nicola R WattsCritical Care and Trauma Division, The George Institute for Global Health, Sydney, Australia.
John MyburghCritical Care and Trauma Division, The George Institute for Global Health, Sydney, Australia.
Fluid-TRIPS and Fluidos Investigators
George Institute for Global Health, The ANZICS Clinical Trials Group, BRICNet, and the REVA research Network
The University of Sydney · AUThe George Institute for Global Health · AUUNSW Sydney · AUCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Henri-Mondor · FRChinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College · CNCopenhagen University Hospital · DKD’Or Institute for Research and Education · BRHospital do Coração · BRJena University Hospital · DEOttawa Hospital · CAPeking University · CNUniversidade Federal de São Paulo · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn 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.

methodsIn 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.

findingsIn 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 = <0.001). For secular trends in fluid resuscitation, 84 ICUs in 17 countries contributed data. In 2007, 527/1663 (31.7%) patients received fluid resuscitation during 1167 episodes compared to 491/1763 (27.9%) patients during 960 episodes in 2014. The use of crystalloids increased from 498/1167 (42.7%) in 2007 to 694/960 (72.3%) in 2014 (odds ratio (OR) 3.75, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.95 to 4.77; p = <0.001), primarily due to a significant increase in the use of buffered salt solutions. The use of colloids decreased from 724/1167 (62.0%) in 2007 to 297/960 (30.9%) in 2014 (OR 0.29, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.43; p = <0.001), primarily due to a decrease in the use of HES, but an overall increase in the use of albumin.

conclusionsClinical practices of intravenous fluid resuscitation have changed between 2007 and 2014. Geographical location remains a strong predictor of the type of fluid administered for fluid resuscitation. Overall, there is a preferential use of crystalloids, specifically buffered salt solutions, over colloids. There is now an imperative to conduct a trial determining the safety and efficacy of these fluids on patient-centred outcomes.

trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov: Fluid-Translation of research into practice study (Fluid-TRIPS) NCT02002013.

Indexed as

AdultColloidsCross-Sectional StudiesCrystalloid SolutionsFluid TherapyHumansIntensive Care UnitsIsotonic SolutionsMultivariate AnalysisRehydration SolutionsColloidsCrystalloid SolutionsIsotonic SolutionsRehydration Solutions

Identifiers

PMID28498856
PMCPMC5428917
OpenAlexW2614024591

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.