Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2024 Aug;21(4):415-428.
doi: 10.1111/wvn.12718. Epub 2024 Mar 22.

Respiratory support in the emergency department: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Jane O'Donnell  1 , Alison Pirret  2 , Karen Hoare  2 , Rebecca Fenn  2 , Elissa McDonald  2
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Respiratory support in the emergency department: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Jane O'Donnell et al. Worldviews Evid Based Nurs. 2024 Aug.

Abstract

Background: An estimated 20% of emergency department (ED) patients require respiratory support (RS). Evidence suggests that nasal high flow (NHF) reduces RS need.

Aims: This review compared NHF to conventional oxygen therapy (COT) or noninvasive ventilation (NIV) in adult ED patients.

Method: The systematic review (SR) and meta-analysis (MA) methods reflect the Cochrane Collaboration methodology. Six databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing NHF to COT or NIV use in the ED. Three summary estimates were reported: (1) need to escalate care, (2) mortality, and (3) adverse events (AEs).

Results: This SR and MA included 18 RCTs (n = 1874 participants). Two of the five MA conclusions were statistically significant. Compared with COT, NHF reduced the risk of escalation by 45% (RR 0.55; 95% CI [0.33, 0.92], p = .02, NNT = 32); however, no statistically significant differences in risk of mortality (RR 1.02; 95% CI [0.68, 1.54]; p = .91) and AE (RR 0.98; 95% CI [0.61, 1.59]; p = .94) outcomes were found. Compared with NIV, NHF increased the risk of escalation by 60% (RR 1.60; 95% CI [1.10, 2.33]; p = .01); mortality risk was not statistically significant (RR 1.23, 95% CI [0.78, 1.95]; p = .37).

Linking evidence to action: Evidence-based decision-making regarding RS in the ED is challenging. ED clinicians have at times had to rely on non-ED evidence to support their practice. Compared with COT, NHF was seen to be superior and reduced the risk of escalation. Conversely, for this same outcome, NIV was superior to NHF. However, substantial clinical heterogeneity was seen in the NIV delivered. Research considering NHF versus NIV is needed. COVID-19 has exposed the research gaps and slowed the progress of ED research.

Keywords: COVID‐19; emergency; high‐flow nasal cannula; meta‐analysis; nasal high flow; oxygenation; respiratory; systematic review.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

REFERENCES

    1. Adams, J., Hillier‐Brown, F. C., Moore, H. J., Lake, A. A., Araujo‐Soares, V., White, M., & Summerbell, C. (2016). Searching and synthesising ‘grey literature’ and ‘grey information’ in public health: Critical reflections on three case studies. Systematic Reviews, 5(1), 164. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643‐016‐0337‐y
    1. Al Chikhanie, Y., Veale, D., Verges, S., & Herengt, F. (2021). The effect of heated humidified nasal high flow oxygen supply on exercise tolerance in patients with interstitial lung disease: A pilot study. Respiratory Medicine, 186, 106523. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rmed.2021.106523
    1. Attia, G. A., Bediwy, A. S., & Ashour, R. M. (2017). Comparison between the effect of heated and humidified high‐flow nasal oxygen and conventional oxygen during acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. Egyptian Journal of Bronchology, 11(3), 224–230. https://doi.org/10.4103/1687‐8426.211399
    1. Ayuse, T., Hisamatsu, N., Yamaguchi, T., Takahashi, Y., Tamada, Y., Kurata, S., Mishima, G., Pinkham, M., Tatkov, S., Takahata, H., & Ayuse, T. (2020). Efficacy of nasal high flow therapy on the coordination between breathing and swallowing of saliva during daytime nap in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients: A single center, randomized crossover controlled study. Medicine (Baltimore), 99(34), e21778. https://doi.org/10.1097/md.0000000000021778
    1. Azoulay, E., Lemiale, V., Mokart, D., Nseir, S., Argaud, L., Pène, F., Kontar, L., Bruneel, F., Klouche, K., Barbier, F., Reignier, J., Berrahil‐Meksen, L., Louis, G., Constantin, J. M., Mayaux, J., Wallet, F., Kouatchet, A., Peigne, V., Théodose, I., … Demoule, A. (2018). Effect of high‐flow nasal oxygen vs standard oxygen on 28‐day mortality in immunocompromised patients with acute respiratory failure: The HIGH randomized clinical trial. JAMA, 320(20), 2099–2107. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2018.14282

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources