Skip to main content

Table 3 Quality of evidence of studies that compared HFNC to NIV that were included in the meta-analysis, according to Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE)

From: High-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy is superior to conventional oxygen therapy but not to noninvasive mechanical ventilation on intubation rate: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Outcomes Anticipated absolute effects (95% CI) Relative effect OR, (95% CI) Participants
(studies), n
Risk of bias Inconsistency Indirection Imprecision Publication bias Quality of the evidence (GRADE)
Risk with NIV Risk with HFNC
Intubation rate 172/841 (20.5%) 164/810 (20.9%) 0.96 (0.66, 1.39) 1651 (3 RCTs) Seriousa Seriousb1 Not serious Seriousc Undetected Very low
Escalation rate 206/841 (24.5%) 198/810 (24.4%) 1.00 (0.77, 1.28) 1651 (3 RCTs) Seriousa Not serious Not serious Seriousc Undetected Low
Mortality 68/841 (8.1%) 59/810 (7.3%) 0.85 (0.43, 1.68) 1651 (3 RCTs) Seriousa Seriousb2 Not serious Seriousc Undetected Very low
  1. COT conventional oxygen therapy, NIV noninvasive mechanical ventilation, HNFC high-flow nasal cannula oxygen, OR odds ratio, RCT randomized controlled trial
  2. aUnblinded intervention
  3. b1 I 2, 53%
  4. b2 I 2, 69%
  5. cWide CI