Trial reportPloS one2019
Clinical efficacy of high-flow nasal humidified oxygen therapy in patients with hypoxemia.
Trial report in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Liberation from mechanical ventilation in critically ill patients: Korean Society of Critical Care Medicine Clinical Practice Guidelines.Acute and critical care · 2024Guideline
- Survival prediction model for hypoxemic patients receiving post-extubation oxygen therapy after invasive ventilation: based on the MIMIC database.Journal of thoracic disease · 2025Article
- Liberation from Mechanical Ventilation in Critically Ill Patients: Korean Society of Critical Care Medicine Clinical Practice Guidelines.Tuberculosis and respiratory diseases · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To evaluate the effectiveness of high-flow nasal humidified oxygen (HFNHO) therapy in patients with mild hypoxemia after extubation. This study included 316 patients with mild hypoxemia after extubation from May 2016 to May 2018 from two intensive care units in China. Compare the effects of the Venturi Mask and High-Flow Nasal Humidified Oxygen (HFNHO) therapy on Heart Rate (HR), Respiratory Rate (RR), Oxygen Saturation (SpO2), Oxygen Partial Pressure (PO2), Partial Pressure Of Carbon Dioxide (PCO2), Oxygenation Index (PO2/FiO2) after extubation, the use of noninvasive mechanical ventilation and tracheal intubation after treatment failure were observed and recorded. Patients have both lower HR and RR than those who received mask treatment (75.4±18.5 vs. 83.0±20.4, p = 0.0004; 18±6.5 vs. 23.6±10.3, p<0.001, respectively). There was significant difference between those who had HFNHO and mask administration's SpO2 and PO2 (94.1±6.4 vs. 87.5±1.5, p<0.001; 88.16±2.9 vs. 77.3±2.3, p<0.001, respectively). For the HFNHO group, patients had lower PCO2 with the mask group. (41.3±0.99 vs 42.2±1.2, p<0.001). On the other hand, the levels of PO2/FiO2 was significantly higher in the HFNHO Group, (181.0±8.3 vs. 157.2±4.9, p<0.05). We concluded HFNHO therapy could significantly relieve the symptoms of dyspnea, improve oxygenation, reduce the use of noninvasive mechanical ventilation and reduce the rate of secondary tracheal intubation in patients with mild hypoxemia after extubation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.