Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35390113›Full record

Trial reportJAMA2022

Effect of High-Flow Nasal Cannula Therapy vs Continuous Positive Airway Pressure Following Extubation on Liberation From Respiratory Support in Critically Ill Children: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Padmanabhan Ramnarayan, Alvin Richards-Belle, Laura Drikite, Michelle Saull, Izabella Orzechowska, Robert Darnell, Zia Sadique, Julie Lester, Kevin P Morris, Lyvonne N Tume and 9 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComparative StudyMulticenter StudyPragmatic Clinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in JAMA, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
12.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

35 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 83 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Respiratory support in paediatric patients with bronchiolitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. High flow nasal cannula for respiratory support in term infants.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023
    Pooled it
  4. Guideline
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Beyond High-flow Nasal Cannula vs Non-invasive Ventilation: The Need for Dynamic Physiological Monitoring in Pediatric Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2026
    Article
  12. The Paediatric Intensive Care Adaptive Platform Trial (PIVOTAL): Turning Pediatric Critical Care Practice Into Clinical Research.Pediatric critical care medicine : a journal of the Society of Critical Care Medicine and the World Federation of Pediatric Intensive and Critical Care Societies · 2026
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

19 authors at 7 institutions in 2 countries.

Padmanabhan RamnarayanSection of Anaesthetics, Pain Medicine, and Intensive Care, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, United Kingdom.
Alvin Richards-BelleClinical Trials Unit, Intensive Care National Audit & Research Centre, London, United Kingdom.
Laura DrikiteClinical Trials Unit, Intensive Care National Audit & Research Centre, London, United Kingdom.
Michelle SaullClinical Trials Unit, Intensive Care National Audit & Research Centre, London, United Kingdom.
Izabella OrzechowskaClinical Trials Unit, Intensive Care National Audit & Research Centre, London, United Kingdom.
Robert DarnellClinical Trials Unit, Intensive Care National Audit & Research Centre, London, United Kingdom.
Zia SadiqueDepartment of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.
Julie LesterParent representative, Sussex, United Kingdom.
Kevin P MorrisBirmingham Children's Hospital, Birmingham Women's and Children's NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
Lyvonne N TumeSchool of Health & Society, University of Salford, Salford, United Kingdom.
Peter J DavisPaediatric Intensive Care Unit, Bristol Royal Hospital for Children, University Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol, United Kingdom.
Mark J PetersPaediatric Intensive Care Unit, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust and NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, London, United Kingdom.
Richard G FeltbowerLeeds Institute for Data Analytics, School of Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom.
Richard GrieveDepartment of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.
Karen ThomasClinical Trials Unit, Intensive Care National Audit & Research Centre, London, United Kingdom.
Paul R MounceyClinical Trials Unit, Intensive Care National Audit & Research Centre, London, United Kingdom.
David A HarrisonClinical Trials Unit, Intensive Care National Audit & Research Centre, London, United Kingdom.
Kathryn M RowanClinical Trials Unit, Intensive Care National Audit & Research Centre, London, United Kingdom.
FIRST-ABC Step-Down RCT Investigators and the Paediatric Critical Care Society Study Group
Intensive Care Society · GBIntensive Care National Audit & Research Centre · GBGreat Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust · GBBristol Royal Hospital for Children · GBLondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine · GBUniversity of Leeds · GBUniversity of Salford · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: The optimal first-line mode of noninvasive respiratory support following extubation of critically ill children is not known. Objective: To evaluate the noninferiority of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) therapy as the first-line mode of noninvasive respiratory support following extubation, compared with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP), on time to liberation from respiratory support. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a pragmatic, multicenter, randomized, noninferiority trial conducted at 22 pediatric intensive care units in the United Kingdom. Six hundred children aged 0 to 15 years clinically assessed to require noninvasive respiratory support within 72 hours of extubation were recruited between August 8, 2019, and May 18, 2020, with last follow-up completed on November 22, 2020. Interventions: Patients were randomized 1:1 to start either HFNC at a flow rate based on patient weight (n = 299) or CPAP of 7 to 8 cm H2O (n = 301). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was time from randomization to liberation from respiratory support, defined as the start of a 48-hour period during which the child was free from all forms of respiratory support (invasive or noninvasive), assessed against a noninferiority margin of an adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of 0.75. There were 6 secondary outcomes, including mortality at day 180 and reintubation within 48 hours. Results: Of the 600 children who were randomized, 553 children (HFNC, 281; CPAP, 272) were included in the primary analysis (median age, 3 months; 241 girls [44%]). HFNC failed to meet noninferiority, with a median time to liberation of 50.5 hours (95% CI, 43.0-67.9) vs 42.9 hours (95% CI, 30.5-48.2) for CPAP (adjusted HR, 0.83; 1-sided 97.5% CI, 0.70-∞). Similar results were seen across prespecified subgroups. Of the 6 prespecified secondary outcomes, 5 showed no significant difference, including the rate of reintubation within 48 hours (13.3% for HFNC vs 11.5 % for CPAP). Mortality at day 180 was significantly higher for HFNC (5.6% vs 2.4% for CPAP; adjusted odds ratio, 3.07 [95% CI, 1.1-8.8]). The most common adverse events were abdominal distension (HFNC: 8/281 [2.8%] vs CPAP: 7/272 [2.6%]) and nasal/facial trauma (HFNC: 14/281 [5.0%] vs CPAP: 15/272 [5.5%]). Conclusions and Relevance: Among critically ill children requiring noninvasive respiratory support following extubation, HFNC compared with CPAP following extubation failed to meet the criterion for noninferiority for time to liberation from respiratory support. Trial Registration: isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN60048867.

Indexed as

Airway ExtubationCannulaContinuous Positive Airway PressureCritical IllnessOxygen Inhalation TherapyAdolescentChildChild, PreschoolFemaleHumansInfantInfant, NewbornMale

Identifiers

PMID35390113
PMCPMC8990361
OpenAlexW4224327146

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.