ArticleNursing open2025
Comparing Nurse-Led and Physician-Led Bilevel Positive Airway Pressure Management in Hypercapnic Respiratory Failure: A Retrospective Cohort Study.
Article in Nursing open, 2025. 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.
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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimBilevel positive airway pressure (BiPAP) management is a cornerstone in treating acute hypercapnic respiratory failure, with varying outcomes depending on the care model. This retrospective cohort study aims to compare the effectiveness of nurse-led versus physician-led BiPAP management in this context.
designRetrospective cohort study.
methodsWe analysed medical records of 189 patients with acute hypercapnic respiratory failure treated with BiPAP between January 2020 and December 2022. Patients were divided into nurse-led (n = 101) and physician-led (n = 88) groups based on their BiPAP management leadership. Outcomes measured included arterial blood gas (ABG) parameter improvements, intubation rates, length of hospital stay and 30-day readmission rates. Statistical analysis involved chi-squared tests, t-tests, Mann-Whitney U tests and multivariable regression to adjust for confounders.
resultsBoth groups demonstrated significant improvements in ABG parameters, with no significant differences between groups. The nurse-led group exhibited a lower intubation rate (9.9% vs. 21.6%, p = 0.026) and higher patient satisfaction scores (median 8 vs. 6, p < 0.001). Mortality rates, complication rates and 30-day readmission rates were similar between the groups. Multivariable logistic regression confirmed the nurse-led group had a lower likelihood of intubation (AOR: 0.401, p = 0.032) and higher patient satisfaction (AOR: 7.770, p < 0.001). PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Our findings indicate that nurse-led and physician-led BiPAP management strategies for acute hypercapnic respiratory failure are equally effective in terms of ABG improvement, intubation rates, hospital stay length, and readmission rates. This suggests that with adequate training and supervision, nurse-led BiPAP management can be as effective as physician-led management, offering a viable alternative in healthcare settings where physician resources are limited.
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.