Introduction

The term “Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome” (ARDS), was first used in 1967 to describe a series of mechanically ventilated patients who developed refractory hypoxia, diffuse pulmonary infiltrates and reduced compliance [1]. Since then, our understanding of the underlying pathophysiology has greatly improved, particularly the role of the ventilator [2]. However, the world-wide incidence remains poorly characterized. The wide range quoted, 5–64 per 100,000 persons per year [3,4], may reflect regional variation in health care practices and different interpretations of ARDS definitions [4,5]. Despite this regional variation, there are very little data characterising the epidemiology of ARDS in Asian countries. Furthermore, the impact of introducing a new ARDS definition in 2012 has not been evaluated in large nationwide studies. As a result, the incidence of ARDS following the newer definition is unknown [6].

Determining the incidence and outcomes for ARDS is necessary for appropriate intensive care resource planning. ARDS management is complex and consumes considerable health resources. In 1999, adult ARDS patients in the USA cost $57,000 per admission and accounted for 2.7 million hospital days [4,7]. In addition, more that 50% of ARDS patients are unable to return to work at 12 months, which may burden societal resources [8]. The current cost of managing ARDS is unknown, but may vary between centres, particularly with the recent increase in the reported use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) for respiratory failure [9].

In this prospective multicentre study we aim to describe the incidence, outcomes, cost and management of ARDS by conducting a nationwide study in a small, high income, Asian country. We hypothesised that these characteristics would be no different to those observed in other high income countries.

Materials and methods

Results

From May 15^th to June 15^th 2015, 1200 ICU admissions occurred, of which 904 patients (73%) required mechanical ventilation for at least 24 hours. Fifteen patients had ARDS (1.25% of ICU admissions), 7 with moderate ARDS and 8 with severe ARDS. No patients met criteria for mild ARDS, but oxygenation data is missing for one patient. The median age was 59 (IQR 52–70), and nearly three quarters (73%) of the patients were male (Table 1). Most of the patients were ethic Chinese (63%), but a quarter were Malay and all Malay patients developed severe ARDS (Table 1). Median body mass index on admission was 22.8 (IQR 20.3–26.4) and the median Apache II score was 33 (IQR 25–40). Most patients were diagnosed as having ARDS due to pneumonia (79%). All patients with ARDS secondary to non-pulmonary sepsis developed severe ARDS.

Download:

• PPT
  PowerPoint slide
• PNG
  larger image
• TIFF
  original image

Table 1. Demographics and general clinical data.

Unless otherwise indicated median is presented and value ranges in brackets represent interquartile range (IQR).

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0179343.t001

At the onset of ARDS, median P/F ratio was 93 (IQR 80–115) and median PEEP was 10 cmH₂O (IQR 8–10), increasing to 15 cmH₂O (IQR 10–16) in the first 24 hours. Median tidal volume was 7.5 ml/kg predicated body weight (PBW), but more than one third of the patients (38%) received a tidal volume exceeding 8 ml/kg PBW. Median plateau pressure (Pplat) was 29 cmH₂O with a corresponding median driving pressure (Pplat—PEEP) of 20 cmH₂O. Only 2 patients were nursed in the prone position, 1 patient received neuromuscular blockers and 1 patient was referred for Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (Table 1). Total in-hospital mortality was 40% (Table 2). The overall, unadjusted, incidence of ARDS was 4.5 per 100,000 population per year and the age-adjusted incidence 5.8/100,000 population per year (Table 2). The median cost, inclusive of subvention, was US$51,730 (IQR US$31,530 –US$90,890). A STROBE checklist and a copy of the anonymised baseline data is attached as S1 and S2 Files. Original data may be requested from the domain specific review board.

Download:

• PPT
  PowerPoint slide
• PNG
  larger image
• TIFF
  original image

Table 2. Summary of the main studies reporting ARDS epidemiology published since 2000.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0179343.t002

Discussion

This is the first nationwide study of ARDS in Southeast Asia. The age-adjusted incidence is comparable to European studies (Table 2), where the reported incidence ranges from 4.9–13.5/100,000 person-years [3,5,6,12,13]. However, similar to European studies, this incidence differs from studies in Australia, New Zealand and the USA [4,14]. The reasons for this disparity remain unclear, but are likely influenced by a variety of factors.

First, the incidence may be affected by interpretation of the definitions, as well as evolution of the definitions over time [4]. Second, interpretation of chest roentgenogram can vary significantly, with intensivists agreeing less than half the time on the presence of bilateral infiltrates [15,16]. Third, seasonal variations in climate may affect the incidence of respiratory illnesses associated with ARDS, though regional variation was preserved in studies covering a year or more [4,5,17]. Fourth, the proportion of ICU beds/100,000 population in the United States is three times the number of beds in Europe and Singapore (Table 2). Countries with high ICU bed availability admit a larger proportion of hospitalised patients to ICU, who tend to be older and have more chronic medical conditions [18]. These characteristics are reported risk factors for ARDS [19].

Our ARDS incidence per ICU bed was much lower than the Asian components of the recent Lung-safe study, where an incidence of 0.27 cases/ICU bed over 4 weeks was seen [6]. However, data collection for Lung-safe occurred during winter, possibly inflating the incidence. Although Singapore has no distinct seasons, an increase in incidence of respiratory infections correlates with winter in either hemisphere [20] and we cannot exclude a higher incidence if data collection had been timed differently.

A surprising observation was the fact that all Malay patients developed severe ARDS, although the overall distribution of race between moderate and severe ARDS patients was not significantly different (Table 1). Whether this represents random variation, genetic susceptibility, socioeconomic differences, or a combination is unclear and warrants further investigation. Race plays an important, complex, role in the presentation of illness [21]. Another surprising observation was the low utilisation rate of rescue interventions. However, we did not collect information regarding contraindications to prone positioning or neuromuscular blockade. In this study we were particularly interested to determine if the cost of managing ARDS patients has increased, since ECMO is now used more frequently. However, only one patient received ECMO during the study period, and our median cost was US$51,730, which is similar to reported costs before adult ECMO use increased [22].

In our study we found that median ventilation settings were consistent with lung protective ventilation (Table 1), but we also identified levels of non-compliance, where over one third of patients received tidal volumes which are not considered protective. Similar findings have been reported in large registry studies in multiple countries [23–28]. Furthermore, driving pressure, a surrogate measure of over distention, was higher than that considered physiological and safe [29]. It is clear from both our study, and others [23–28], that achieving ventilation parameters consistent with lung protective settings in all ARDS patients remains a challenge for intensivists. It is therefore not surprising that the mortality in our study is similar to that reported elsewhere (Table 2).

Our study has several limitations. First, we did not detect any patients mild ARDS during the study period. There is evidence that mild ARDS is under-recognised. In the recent Lung-safe study recognition rates of only 51.3% were seen for mild ARDS, compared with rates of 78.5% for severe ARDS [6]. It is possible that the reliance of the wider multi-disciplinary team to identify ARDS may have introduced susceptibility to clinician under-recognition of mild ARDS. Second, 10 private intensive care units did not participate. These hospitals account for 24% of total hospital admissions, but the population served by the private sector are predominantly the non-resident, expatriate community, who are not included in resident population counts. Third, we collected data for only one month. Under ideal circumstances, we would have tracked the incidence over 12 months or more, but the resources were not available. Several other ARDS studies have been conducted over periods of 10 weeks or less [6,13,30,31], and this may partly explain the variability in published incidence rates.

Conclusion

The adjusted ARDS incidence rate of 5.8/100,000 population in Singapore is similar to incidence rates reported in Europe. Compliance with lung protective ventilation was suboptimal and may reflect the international difficulties in translating research into practise.

Supporting information

Acknowledgments

We sincerely thank the Ngee Ann Polytechnic School nursing students for their help with data collection and Society of Intensive Care Medicine in Singapore for their endorsement of this study. We would also like to acknowledge all the respiratory therapists and nurses at the participating centres for their help with coordination of the study and data collection.