Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33550100›Full record

ArticleThe American journal of emergency medicine2021

Non-invasive positive pressure ventilation versus endotracheal intubation in treatment of COVID-19 patients requiring ventilatory support.

Pia Daniel, Max Mecklenburg, Chanée Massiah, Michael A Joseph, Clara Wilson, Priyanka Parmar, Sabrina Rosengarten, Rohan Maini, Julie Kim, Alvin Oomen and 1 more

Open access · greenAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in The American journal of emergency medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
6.3field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 53 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Noninvasive Respiratory Assist Devices in the Management of COVID-19-related Hypoxic Respiratory Failure: Pune ISCCM COVID-19 ARDS Study Consortium (PICASo).Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2022
    Article
  13. Observational
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Mitigating Viral Dispersion during Respiratory Support Procedures in the ICU.American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine · 2021
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Pia DanielDepartment of Emergency Medicine, SUNY Downstate Health Sciences University, Brooklyn, NY, USA. Electronic address: pia.daniel@downstate.edu.
Max MecklenburgSUNY Downstate Health Sciences University, Brooklyn, NY, USA. Electronic address: max.mecklenburg@downstate.edu.
Chanée MassiahSchool of Public Health, SUNY Downstate Health Sciences University, Brooklyn, NY, USA. Electronic address: chanee.massiah@downstate.edu.
Michael A JosephDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, SUNY Downstate Health Sciences University, Brooklyn, NY, USA. Electronic address: michael.joseph@downstate.edu.
Clara WilsonSUNY Downstate Health Sciences University, Brooklyn, NY, USA.
Priyanka ParmarSUNY Downstate Health Sciences University, Brooklyn, NY, USA.
Sabrina RosengartenSUNY Downstate Health Sciences University, Brooklyn, NY, USA. Electronic address: sabrina.rosengarten@downstate.edu.
Rohan MainiSUNY Downstate Health Sciences University, Brooklyn, NY, USA. Electronic address: rohan.goyal@downstate.edu.
Julie KimSUNY Downstate Health Sciences University, Brooklyn, NY, USA. Electronic address: julie.kim@downstate.edu.
Alvin OomenSUNY Downstate Health Sciences University, Brooklyn, NY, USA. Electronic address: alvin.oomen@downstate.edu.
Shahriar ZehtabchiDepartment of Emergency Medicine, SUNY Downstate Health Sciences University, Brooklyn, NY, USA. Electronic address: shahriar.zehtabchi@downstate.edu.
SUNY Downstate Health Sciences University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

importanceInitial guidelines recommended prompt endotracheal intubation rather than non-invasive ventilation (NIV) for COVID-19 patients requiring ventilator support. There is insufficient data comparing the impact of intubation versus NIV on patient-centered outcomes of these patients.

objectiveTo compare all-cause 30-day mortality for hospitalized COVID-19 patients with respiratory failure who underwent intubation first, intubation after NIV, or NIV only.

designRetrospective study of patients admitted in March and April of 2020.

settingA teaching hospital in Brooklyn, New York City.

participantsAdult COVID-19 confirmed patients who required ventilator support (non-invasive ventilation and/or endotracheal intubation) at discretion of treating physician, were included. EXPOSURES: Patients were categorized into three exposure groups: intubation-first, intubation after NIV, or NIV-only. PRIMARY OUTCOME: 30-day all-cause mortality, a predetermined outcome measured by multivariable logistic regression. Data are presented with medians and interquartile ranges, or percentages with 95% confidence intervals, for continuous and categorical variables, respectively. Covariates for the model were age, sex, qSOFA score ≥ 2, presenting oxygen saturation, vasopressor use, and greater than three comorbidities. A secondary multivariable model compared mortality of all patients that received NIV (intubation after NIV and NIV-only) with the intubation-first group.

resultsA total of 222 were enrolled. Overall mortality was 77.5% (95%CI, 72-83%). Mortality for intubation-first group was 82% (95%CI, 73-89%; 75/91), for Intubation after NIV was 84% (95%CI, 70-92%; 37/44), and for NIV-only was 69% (95%CI, 59-78%; 60/87). In multivariable analysis, NIV-only was associated with decreased all-cause mortality (odds ratio [OR]: 0.30, 95%CI, 0.13-0.69). No difference in mortality was observed between intubation-first and intubation after NIV. Secondary analysis found all patients who received NIV to have lower mortality than patients who were intubated only (OR: 0.44, 95%CI, 0.21-0.95). CONCLUSIONS & RELEVANCE: Utilization of NIV as the initial intervention in COVID-19 patients requiring ventilatory support is associated with significant survival benefit. For patients intubated after NIV, the mortality rate is not worse than those who undergo intubation as their initial intervention.

Indexed as

Intensive Care UnitsAgedCause of DeathCOVID-19FemaleHumansIntubation, IntratrachealMaleMiddle AgedNew York CityPandemicsPositive-Pressure RespirationRespiratory InsufficiencyRetrospective StudiesSARS-CoV-2Survival RateCOVID-19Endotracheal intubationHypoxemiaNon-invasive positive pressure ventilation

Identifiers

PMID33550100
PMCPMC7844386
OpenAlexW3128976365

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.