SynthesisBrazilian journal of physical therapy
Noninvasive ventilation in adults with blunt chest trauma: A meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.
Synthesis in Brazilian journal of physical therapy. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- ARDS management in trauma patients.Intensive care medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNoninvasive ventilation (NIV) is used in patients with post-traumatic respiratory failure, however, previous reviews indicate that its effects remain uncertain due to limited data.
objectiveTo evaluate the effects of NIV on mortality, complications, infection, and intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital length of stay in adult patients with blunt chest trauma.
methodsMEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, Web of Science, PEDro and Scielo were searched from inception to February 2024. Randomized clinical trials comparing NIV with invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) or oxygen therapy for respiratory failure in adults with blunt chest trauma were included. The outcomes analyzed were mortality, complications, infections, and length of stay in the ICU. Risk of bias was assessed using the RoB 2.0. Certainty of evidence was evaluated according to Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE).
resultsSix studies (300 patients) were included. Meta-analysis showed that NIV likely reduces mortality (5 studies, Odds Ratio [OR] = 0.15; 95%CI 0.06, 0.37; moderate certainty of evidence) compared with IMV. NIV may reduce complications (5 studies; OR= 0.10, 95%CI 0.05, 0.20) and infections (4 studies; OR = 0.11, 95%CI: 0.05, 0.24) (moderate certainty of evidence for both). For length of stay in the ICU, NIV may reduce the number of days in the ICU (5 studies; mean difference = -2.29 days; 95%CI -3.78, -0.80; low certainty of evidence) compared with IMV.
conclusionNIV has the potential to reduce mortality, complications, infections, and ICU length of stay, compared to IMV in patients with respiratory failure after blunt chest trauma.
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.