Skip to main content

Table 4 Summary of findings

From: High-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy versus conventional oxygen therapy in patients after planned extubation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Outcomes Anticipated absolute effects* (95% CI) Relative effect
(95% CI)
No. of participants
(studies)
Certainty of the evidence
(GRADE)
Comments
Risk with COT Risk with HFNC
Postextubation respiratory failure 219 per 1000 136 per 1000
(92 to 202)
RR 0.62
(0.42 to 0.92)
1067
(5 RCTs)

High
 
PaO2 (mmHg) The mean paO2 was 83.63 mmHg The mean paO2 in the intervention group was 89.39 mmHg (75.91 to 102.86 mmHg) 497
(5 RCTs)

High
 
Respiratory rates
(breaths per minute)
The mean respiratory rates was 23.24 breaths per minute The mean respiratory rates in the intervention group was 20.4 breaths per minute (18.84 to 21.95 breaths per minute) 311
(5 RCTs)

High
Respiratory rates obtained from the study by Maggiore and colleague was reported with cartograms, and we extracted data with DigitizeIt software (Braunschweig, Germany).
Reintubation 82 per 1000 48 per 1000
(25 to 91)
RR 0.58
(0.30 to 1.11)
1562
(7 RCTs)

High
 
  1. Patient or population: patients after planned extubation
  2. Setting:
  3. Intervention: HFNC
  4. Comparison: COT
  5. GRADE Working Group grades of evidence:
  6. High certainty: We are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect
  7. Moderate certainty: We are moderately confident in the effect estimate—the true effect is likely to be close to the estimate of the effect, but there is a possibility that it is substantially different
  8. Low certainty: Our confidence in the effect estimate is limited—the true effect may be substantially different from the estimate of the effect
  9. Very low certainty: We have very little confidence in the effect estimate—the true effect is likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect
  10. *The risk in the intervention group (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI)
  11. CI confidence interval, RR risk ratio