ArticlePediatric pulmonology2025
High-flow nasal cannulas versus standard oxygen therapy for moderate bronchiolitis: a quasi-experimental analysis.
Article in Pediatric pulmonology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical and epidemiological profile of infants with severe bronchiolitis before and after the COVID-19 pandemic.Jornal de pediatria · 2026Article
- High-flow nasal cannulas versus standard oxygen therapy for moderate bronchiolitis: a quasi-experimental analysis.Pediatric pulmonology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIn the last decades none of the medical therapies investigated have shown clear efficacy in the treatment of bronchiolitis, and literature agrees on a general de-implementation of pharmacological therapies, recognizing an effective role only to nutritional support and oxygen therapy. High-flow nasal cannulas (HFNC) has become increasingly popular in the last decade, despite its lack of clear efficacy. Recent randomized controlled trials (RCT) comparing standard oxygen therapy (SOT) and HFNC did not demonstrate significant benefit of HFNC. To acquire more clinical data on HFNC efficacy we performed a retrospective, quasi-experimental analysis of patients admitted for bronchiolitis in the epidemic seasons 2021-2022 and 2022-2023.
methodsTo assess the efficacy of SOT and HFNC we used a pragmatic approach, a fuzzy regression discontinuity design, which is a quasi-experimental test. Unlike RCTs, this process is not a true randomization, but may be interpreted as quasi-randomization in an observational setting.
resultsHFNC did not reduce length of oxygen therapy (LOO) nor length of hospitalization (LOS) (respectively, p: 0.383 and p: 0.454). Treatment failure was not significantly different in the treatment groups (p: 0.354).
conclusionsIt is crucial to perform additional RCTs with uniform protocols to determine the efficacy of HFNC more accurately in the treatment of bronchiolitis. HFNC does not reduce LOO, suggesting that early use of HFNC does not change the course of disease in moderate bronchiolitis. In view of the greater complexity and higher cost, HFNC should not be routinely used as first-line treatment in children with moderate respiratory distress and mild hypoxemia.
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.