You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT JAMA
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 291 No. 16, April 28, 2004 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  JAMA
  •  Online Features
  Letters
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Related articles
 •Similar articles in JAMA
 Topic Collections
 •Surgery
 •Surgical Physiology
 •Surgical Infections
 •Alert me on articles by topic
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Supplemental Oxygen and Risk of Surgical Site Infection—Reply

Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

In Reply: Dr Hopf and colleagues note that our protocol permitted management variability. Our "real world" design allowed us to evaluate the effect of oxygen as it would be used in practice—if the benefit of hyperoxia depends upon an unrealistically tight set of cofactors, then its usefulness as a routine intervention is questionable. We acknowledged the potential biases involved. However, given that the issue faced by anesthesiologists and surgeons was whether hyperoxia should become standard practice, the practical question of our study is whether any inequalities between the groups were so large as to have concealed a significantly beneficial effect of hyperoxia. We strongly doubt this to be true. In comparing our results with those of Greif et al,1 it is imperative to note critical differences in the patients studied. For example, 30% of their patients were transfused with an average of 3 units of blood, compared with 3% receiving . . . [Full Text of this Article]

Kane O. Pryor, MD
kopryor@yahoo.com
Department of Anesthesiology

Thomas J. Fahey III, MD
Department of Surgery

Cynthia A. Lien, MD; Peter A. Goldstein, MD
Department of Anesthesiology
Weill Medical College of Cornell University
New York, NY



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?

RELATED ARTICLES

Supplemental Oxygen and Risk of Surgical Site Infection
Harriet W. Hopf, Thomas K. Hunt, and Noah Rosen
JAMA. 2004;291(16):1956.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Supplemental Oxygen and Risk of Surgical Site Infection
Ozan Akça and Daniel I. Sessler
JAMA. 2004;291(16):1956-1957.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Supplemental Oxygen and Risk of Surgical Site Infection
Robert Greif and Daniel I. Sessler
JAMA. 2004;291(16):1957.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Supplemental Oxygen and Risk of Surgical Site Infection
Johann Harten, Keith Anderson, and John Kinsella
JAMA. 2004;291(16):1957.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Supplemental Oxygen and Risk of Surgical Site Infection
James T. Lee
JAMA. 2004;291(16):1957-1958.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Supplemental Oxygen and Risk of Surgical Site Infection
Martin J. O'Neill, Jr
JAMA. 2004;291(16):1958.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Surgical Site Infection and the Routine Use of Perioperative Hyperoxia in a General Surgical Population: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Kane O. Pryor, Thomas J. Fahey, III, Cynthia A. Lien, and Peter A. Goldstein
JAMA. 2004;291(1):79-87.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  






HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 2004 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.