ArticleInternational journal of emergency medicine2025
Comparison of high-flow nasal oxygen therapy and noninvasive ventilation in suspected sepsis patients with acute respiratory distress in the emergency department: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in International journal of emergency medicine, 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.
- My approach to respiratory sepsis: pulmonary.Breathe (Sheffield, England) · 2026Review
- Comparison of Heated Humidified High-flow Nasal Cannula and Noninvasive Ventilation in Children with Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure Using Clinical Respiratory Score: A Prospective Observational Study.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care MedicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionHigh-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) and non-invasive ventilation (NIV) are widely utilized respiratory support modalities for patients presenting with suspected sepsis and respiratory distress.This study aims to compare the 48-hour intubation rates between HFNC and NIV therapies in patients with suspected sepsis and respiratory distress.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study collected data over a 2-year period (January 2022 to December 2023) from patients presenting to the ED of Ramathibodi Hospital with suspected sepsis who received respiratory support with either HFNC or NIV. To analyze the incidence of intubation and 28-day mortality, we employed multivariable Cox regression to estimate hazard ratios (HRs). The hospital length of stay and ventilator-free days at 28 days were compared using Gaussian regression analysis.
resultsA total of 546 patients met the inclusion criteria. The intubation at 48 h was 17.39% in the HFNC group and 19.47% in the NIV group (adjusted HR 0.74; 95% CI, 0.48 to 1.15; p = 0.18). The HFNC group demonstrated a trend toward lower 28-day mortality than the NIV group (adjusted HR 0.34; 95% CI, 0.12 to 1.02; p = 0.053). Additionally, the HFNC group had significantly more ventilator-free days (adjusted mean difference 1.46 days; 95% CI, 0.11 to 2.80; p = 0.034).
conclusionsIn patients with suspected sepsis and acute respiratory distress, HFNC therapy did not significantly reduce the 48-hour intubation compared to NIV. However, HFNC was associated with a trend toward lower 28-day mortality and a significantly greater number of ventilator-free days on day 28.
trial registrationThis trial was retrospectively registered in the Thai Clinical Trial Registry on 09 November 2023. The TCTR identification number is TCTR20231109004.
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.