ArticleEmergency medicine international2019
Use High-Flow Nasal Cannula for Acute Respiratory Failure Patients in the Emergency Department: A Meta-Analysis Study.
Article in Emergency medicine international, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- High-Flow Nasal Oxygen Versus Conventional Oxygen Therapy and Non-Invasive Ventilation for Acute Respiratory Failure in the Emergency Department: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Emergency medicine Australasia : EMA · 2026Pooled it
- High-flow nasal oxygen therapy compared with conventional oxygen therapy in hospitalised patients with respiratory illness: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMJ open respiratory research · 2024Pooled it
- Article
- Article
- Article
- Hemodynamic and respiratory support in pulmonary embolism: a narrative review.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Review
- Respiratory support of adults in the emergency department: A protocol for a prospective, observational, multicenter point prevalence study.Health science reports · 2023Article
- Effectiveness of high flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy in patients of acute pulmonary thromboembolism with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure.Medical journal, Armed Forces India · 2022Article
- Effectiveness and Harms of High-Flow Nasal Oxygen for Acute Respiratory Failure: An Evidence Report for a Clinical Guideline From the American College of Physicians.Annals of internal medicine · 2021Review
- High-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy as an emerging option for respiratory failure: the present and the future.Therapeutic advances in chronic disease · 2020Review
- High-Flow Nasal Cannula in Transport: Process, Results, and Considerations.Air medical journalArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the efficacy of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) therapy compared with conventional oxygen therapy (COT) or noninvasive ventilation (NIV) for the treatment of acute respiratory failure (ARF) in emergency departments (EDs).
methodWe comprehensively searched 3 databases (PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library) for articles published from database inception to 12 July 2019. This study included only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that were conducted in EDs and compared HFNC therapy with COT or NIV. The primary outcome was the intubation rate. The secondary outcomes were the mortality rate, intensive care unit (ICU) admission rate, ED discharge rate, need for escalation, length of ED stay, length of hospital stay, and patient dyspnea and comfort scores.
resultFive RCTs (
conclusionAdministering HFNC therapy in ARF patients in EDs might decrease the intubation rate compared with COT. In addition, it can decrease the need for escalation, decrease the patient's dyspnea level, and increase the patient's comfort level compared with COT.
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.