ArticleEinstein (Sao Paulo, Brazil)2021
High-flow nasal cannula failure: can clinical outcomes determine early interruption?
Article in Einstein (Sao Paulo, Brazil), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Predictive factors for high-flow nasal cannula failure in patients with acute viral bronchiolitis admitted to the pediatric intensive care unit.Critical care science · 2025Article
- ROX index as a predictor of failure of high-flow nasal cannula in infants with bronchiolitis.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- When to Transfer: Predictors of Pediatric High Flow Nasal Cannula Failure at a Community Hospital.Hospital pediatrics · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the evolution of clinical outcomes in children with bronchiolitis who used a high-flow nasal cannula, and to determine after long of non-clinical improvement the therapy should be discontinued, and treatment should be escalated to other forms of ventilatory support.
methodsAn observational retrospective study of infants with bronchiolitis who used a high-flow nasal cannula. Patients were divided into two study groups according to success or failure of high-flow nasal cannula therapy, namely the Success Group and the Failure Group. The main demographics and clinical variables were assessed 30 minutes and 6 hours after initiating therapy until removal of the high-flow nasal cannula.
resultsA total of 83 children were studied and 18 children (21.7%) failed therapy. Among subjects with successful therapy, a significant decrease in respiratory rate (p<0.001), and a significant increase in peripheral oxygen saturation (p<0.001) were observed within 30 minutes. The Success Group was significantly different from the Failure Group after 6 hours, for both respiratory rate (p<0.01) and peripheral oxygen saturation (p<0.01).
conclusionThe absence of clinical sign improvement within 30 minutes and for up to a maximum of 6 hours can be considered as failure of the high-flow nasal cannula therapy. If this time elapses with no improvements, escalating to another type of ventilatory support should be considered.
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.