Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33577565›Full record

Trial reportPloS one2021

Assessment of dispersion of airborne particles of oral/nasal fluid by high flow nasal cannula therapy.

M C Jermy, C J T Spence, R Kirton, J F O'Donnell, N Kabaliuk, S Gaw, H Hockey, Y Jiang, Z Zulkhairi Abidin, R L Dougherty and 4 more

Open access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

M C JermyDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand.ORCID 0000-0002-9374-7570
C J T SpenceFisher and Paykel Healthcare, Auckland, New Zealand.
R KirtonFisher and Paykel Healthcare, Auckland, New Zealand.
J F O'DonnellFisher and Paykel Healthcare, Auckland, New Zealand.
N KabaliukDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand.
S GawSchool of Physical and Chemical Sciences, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand.
H HockeyBiometric Matters Ltd, Hamilton, New Zealand.
Y JiangDepartment of Statistics, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Z Zulkhairi AbidinDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand.
R L DoughertyDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, University of Kansas, Lawrence, United States of America.
P RoweFisher and Paykel Healthcare, Auckland, New Zealand.ORCID 0000-0002-2187-5223
A S MahaliyanaSchool of Physical and Chemical Sciences, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand.
A GibbsSchool of Physical and Chemical Sciences, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand.
S A RobertsDepartment of Microbiology Lab Plus, Auckland District Health Board, Auckland, New Zealand.
University of Canterbury · NZFisher & Paykel Healthcare (New Zealand) · NZAuckland District Health Board · NZUniversity of Auckland · NZUniversity of Kansas · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNasal High Flow (NHF) therapy delivers flows of heated humidified gases up to 60 LPM (litres per minute) via a nasal cannula. Particles of oral/nasal fluid released by patients undergoing NHF therapy may pose a cross-infection risk, which is a potential concern for treating COVID-19 patients.

methodsLiquid particles within the exhaled breath of healthy participants were measured with two protocols: (1) high speed camera imaging and counting exhaled particles under high magnification (6 participants) and (2) measuring the deposition of a chemical marker (riboflavin-5-monophosphate) at a distance of 100 and 500 mm on filter papers through which air was drawn (10 participants). The filter papers were assayed with HPLC. Breathing conditions tested included quiet (resting) breathing and vigorous breathing (which here means nasal snorting, voluntary coughing and voluntary sneezing). Unsupported (natural) breathing and NHF at 30 and 60 LPM were compared.

resultsImaging: During quiet breathing, no particles were recorded with unsupported breathing or 30 LPM NHF (detection limit for single particles 33 μm). Particles were detected from 2 of 6 participants at 60 LPM quiet breathing at approximately 10% of the rate caused by unsupported vigorous breathing. Unsupported vigorous breathing released the greatest numbers of particles. Vigorous breathing with NHF at 60 LPM, released half the number of particles compared to vigorous breathing without NHF.Chemical marker tests: No oral/nasal fluid was detected in quiet breathing without NHF (detection limit 0.28 μL/m3). In quiet breathing with NHF at 60 LPM, small quantities were detected in 4 out of 29 quiet breathing tests, not exceeding 17 μL/m3. Vigorous breathing released 200-1000 times more fluid than the quiet breathing with NHF. The quantities detected in vigorous breathing were similar whether using NHF or not.

conclusionDuring quiet breathing, 60 LPM NHF therapy may cause oral/nasal fluid to be released as particles, at levels of tens of μL per cubic metre of air. Vigorous breathing (snort, cough or sneeze) releases 200 to 1000 times more oral/nasal fluid than quiet breathing (p < 0.001 with both imaging and chemical marker methods). During vigorous breathing, 60 LPM NHF therapy caused no statistically significant difference in the quantity of oral/nasal fluid released compared to unsupported breathing. NHF use does not increase the risk of dispersing infectious aerosols above the risk of unsupported vigorous breathing. Standard infection prevention and control measures should apply when dealing with a patient who has an acute respiratory infection, independent of which, if any, respiratory support is being used. CLINICAL

trial registrationACTRN12614000924651.

Indexed as

ExhalationAdultBreath TestsCannulaCOVID-19FemaleHumansMaleMicroscopy, VideoNoseOxygen Inhalation TherapyRespirationRespiratory Rate

Identifiers

PMID33577565
PMCPMC7880466
OpenAlexW3126542125

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.