Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40909075›Full record

ArticleCureus2025

Oxygen on Arrival: An Audit of Prescription Practices in the Emergency Assessment Unit.

Fatima Khalid, Rania M ElTahir

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
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

2 authors.

Fatima KhalidAcute Medicine, Salford Royal National Health Service (NHS) Foundation Trust, Manchester, GBR.
Rania M ElTahirMedicine, Salford Royal National Health Service (NHS) Foundation Trust, Manchester, GBR.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction Oxygen is a routinely administered, yet prescription-only therapy in hospital settings. Inappropriate prescribing can result in significant harm, particularly in patients at risk of type 2 respiratory failure. This audit aimed to evaluate adherence to guidelines on oxygen prescribing during admission clerking in the Emergency Assessment Unit (EAU) of Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust, a UK tertiary care hospital. Methods A retrospective review of 100 consecutive patients admitted to the EAU over one month was conducted. Data were collected on oxygen prescription at initial clerking and throughout inpatient stay. A supplementary questionnaire assessed junior doctors' confidence and barriers related to oxygen prescribing. Results Only 45% (45) of patients had oxygen prescribed at initial clerking, with a further 26% (26) prescribed later. However, 29 (29%) never received a documented oxygen prescription. Among 19 chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients, eight (42%) were never prescribed oxygen. Errors were found in four (9%) of prescriptions, and out-of-hours admissions were associated with higher omission rates. Of 11 junior doctor respondents, nine (82%) reported lacking formal training on oxygen prescribing, and six (55%) felt the current system did not support safe practice. Conclusion Oxygen prescribing during acute admissions remains suboptimal. Gaps in documentation, clinical oversight, and training-especially out of hours-contribute to non-compliance with standards. System-level changes such as mandatory electronic prompts, improved documentation processes, and targeted education are urgently needed to enhance patient safety and prescribing practices.

Indexed as

acute medicinebritish thoracic societyclinical auditemergency assessment unithospital prescribinghypoxemia managementoxygen prescriptionpatient safetyprescribing compliancetarget saturation

Identifiers

PMID40909075
PMCPMC12406073

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.