Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 3 Comparisons of PaO2/FiO2 of patients in the success and failure groups with different support methods

From: Efficacy and safety of early prone positioning combined with HFNC or NIV in moderate to severe ARDS: a multi-center prospective cohort study

 PaO2/FiO2 for low level (LL) of support (mmHg)PaO2/FiO2 for high level (HL) of support (mmHg)P value
In success patients (LL vs HL)
 HFNC vs HFNC+PP95 ± 22130 ± 350.016*
 HFNC+PP vs NIV131 ± 38156 ± 360.046*
 NIV vs NIV+PP166 ± 12140 ± 300.133
In failure patients (LL vs HL)
 HFNC vs HFNC+PP102 ± 15113 ± 250.349
 HFNC+PP vs NIV125 ± 1865 ± 70.180
 NIV vs NIV+PP111 ± 2077 ± 140.011*
  1. NIV non-invasive ventilation, HFNC high-flow nasal cannula, PP prone position, LL low level, HL high level