ArticleBMJ open respiratory research2025
Practices of high-flow nasal therapy in acute and chronic respiratory failure: the Hi-Flow Survey.
Article in BMJ open respiratory research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Personalizing Peri-Intubation Oxygenation in Patients at Risk of Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure: A Phenotype-Driven Narrative Review of High-Flow Nasal Oxygen and Non-Invasive Ventilation.Journal of personalized medicine · 2026Review
- Early career member highlights from the ERS Respiratory Failure and Mechanical Ventilation Conference 2026.Breathe (Sheffield, England) · 2026Article
- Use of nasal high-flow in emergency departments: a four-nation UK-wide survey.Emergency medicine journal : EMJ · 2026Article
- The SIS NET ICU study: characteristics of patients with severe community acquired pneumonia admitted to Italian ICUs-a multicenter prospective observational study.Journal of anesthesia, analgesia and critical care · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHigh-flow nasal therapy (HFNT) is a widely used non-invasive respiratory support technique, but data on its clinical application remain limited. This study aimed to assess clinicians' self-reported practices, perceptions and barriers regarding HFNT use in acute and chronic respiratory failure.
methodsA cross-sectional web-based survey was disseminated among members of the European Respiratory Society's respiratory intensive care, rehabilitation and chronic care, and allied respiratory professionals assemblies from September to November 2023. Descriptive analysis was performed, with results presented as frequencies and percentages.
resultsA total of 1176 clinicians from 104 countries participated, primarily pulmonologists (78.3%) and respiratory therapists (9.7%). HFNT was most commonly used for de novo acute respiratory failure (56.2%) and interstitial lung disease exacerbations (56.3%), with lower utilisation for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease with hypercapnia (47.4%) and trauma/atelectasis (41.5%). Despite guideline recommendations, 67% of respondents initiated HFNT only after conventional oxygen therapy failure. HFNT was also frequently used for symptom relief in palliative care, despite limited supporting evidence. Respiratory distress was the primary clinical trigger for HFNT initiation, while the ROX (Respiratory Rate-Oxygenation) index was rarely used to guide escalation of care (32%). Barriers to HFNT adoption included equipment costs (23%), lack of funding (22%) and limited clinician knowledge (18%). HFNT use increased during the COVID-19 pandemic (84%), but long-term application for chronic respiratory failure remained rare (16%).
conclusionsThis survey highlights significant variability in HFNT practices and a disconnect between guidelines and real-world implementation. Addressing financial and educational barriers may improve adherence to evidence-based recommendations.
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.