Skip to main content

Table 2 Primary and secondary endpoints in the two treatment groups

From: The effects of a 2-h trial of high-flow oxygen by nasal cannula versus Venturi mask in immunocompromised patients with hypoxemic acute respiratory failure: a multicenter randomized trial

  HFNO group Venturi mask group P value
(n = 52) (n = 48)
Primary endpoint
 Number (%) of patients requiring mechanical ventilation 8 (15 %) 4 (8 %) 0.36
  Noninvasive mechanical ventilation 6a 3a
  Invasive mechanical ventilation 4 2
Secondary endpoints, median [25th–75th percentile]
 Discomfort VAS scoreb at 120 min 3 [1–5] 3 [0–5] 0.88
 Dyspnea VAS scoreb at 120 min 3 [2 – 6] 3 [1–6] 0.87
 Thirst VAS scoreb at 120 min 6 [3–8] 6 [5 – 9] 0.40
 Respiratory rate at 120 min, breaths/min 25 [22–29] 25 [21–31]  
 Heart rate at 120 min, beats/min 98 [90–110] 99 [83–112] 0.43
  1. HFNO high-flow nasal oxygen, VAS visual analogue scale
  2. aTwo patients in the HFNO group and one patient in the Venturi mask group received noninvasive ventilation followed by invasive mechanical ventilation
  3. bAll three VASs ranged from 0 (absence of discomfort, dyspnea, or thirst) to 10 (worst possible discomfort, dyspnea, or thirst)