ArticleGlobal health & medicine2023
High-flow nasal cannula for severe COVID-19 patients in a Japanese single-center, retrospective, observational study: 1 year of clinical experience.
Article in Global health & medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
22 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) can be effective in treating type 1 respiratory failure by reducing the severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The purpose of this study was to assess the reduction of disease severity and safety of HFNC treatment in patients with severe COVID-19. We retrospectively observed 513 consecutive patients with COVID-19 admitted to our hospital from January 2020 to January 2021. We included patients with severe COVID-19 who received HFNC for their deteriorating respiratory status. HFNC success was defined as improvement in respiratory status after HFNC and transfer to conventional oxygen therapy, while HFNC failure was defined as transfer to non-invasive positive pressure ventilation or ventilator, or death after HFNC. Predictive factors associated with failure to prevent severe disease were identified. Thirty-eight patients received HFNC. Twenty-five (65.8%) patients were classified in the HFNC success group. In the univariate analysis, age, history of chronic kidney disease (CKD), non-respiratory sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) ≥ 1, oxygen saturation to fraction of inspired oxygen ratio (SpO
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.