Observational studyThe European respiratory journal2025
Comparison of oronasal and nasal masks in home mechanical ventilation: an observational cohort and bench study.
Observational study in The European respiratory journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Impact of positive airway pressure for chronic hypercapnic respiratory failure on sleep quality: a systematic review and meta-analysis.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2025Pooled it
- Retrospective Propensity-Matched Comparison of Noninvasive Positive Pressure Ventilation Versus High-Flow Nasal Cannula on Reintubation Rates in Neurosurgical Intensive Care Patients.Neurocritical care · 2026Article
- Relevance of telemonitoring algorithms for the management of home noninvasive ventilation.ERJ open research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn patients with chronic respiratory failure, home non-invasive ventilation (NIV) is delivered through oronasal or nasal masks. Masks are a cornerstone for NIV success but can be associated with side-effects. However, the type, frequency and consequences of these side-effects are unknown. Here, we aimed to study the prevalence, nature and impact of mask-related adverse events in a cohort of stable patients. We then investigated differences between oronasal and nasal masks both in our cohort and in a bench study.
methodsThis was a prospective observational cohort including patients established on long-term NIV admitted for their elective review. Data regarding mask-related side-effects were assessed using a structured questionnaire. Our bench study was performed using a three-dimensional printed head connected to an artificial lung.
results800 patients were included, of whom 84% had an oronasal mask. Moderate to very severe mask-related side-effects occurred in 47% of patients and severe to very severe side-effects occurred in 18% of patients. Side-effects were associated with poorer daytime arterial partial pressure of carbon dioxide (p=0.005), poorer subjective sleep quality (p=0.003) and poorer quality of life (p<0.001). Mask-related side-effects were more frequently reported with the use of oronasal masks compared to nasal masks (p=0.023). Our bench study showed that nasal masks were more stable than oronasal masks (p<0.001).
conclusionsMask-related side-effects are frequent and associated with poorer outcomes. Our data suggest that nasal masks may have a better tolerance profile and should be used as a first-line interface.
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.