Observational studyPloS one2025
Factors associated with the survival of adults with COVID-19 using a high-flow nasal cannula in a tertiary hospital in northern Peru during the second wave of the pandemic.
Observational study in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo identify factors associated with survival in patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) for COVID-19 who used high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) in a tertiary hospital in northern Peru during March to May 2021. METHODOLOGY: A retrospective observational cohort study was carried out, including medical records selected according to established inclusion criteria. The dependent variable was survival, measured in days from admission to hospital discharge or death. Factors associated with survival related to demographic, clinical, laboratory, and imaging characteristics were investigated, as well as treatment-related parameters and variables associated with the use of HFNC. Hazard ratios (HR) were estimated to identify independent risk factors associated with survival.
resultsOf 154 patients, the mean age was 58.29 years. The most frequent comorbidities were arterial hypertension (29.2%), diabetes mellitus (20.6%), and obesity (17.4%). The median time of HFNC use was 5 days (interquartile range: 3-9 days). It was found that 32.2% of the patients required mechanical ventilation, and 51.6% died. The mean time of mechanical ventilation use was 15.1 ± 13.3 days. Survival was 97.5% at 48 hours, 85% at 7 days, 62% at 14 days, and 16.3% at the end of the study. Variables decreasing survival in patients with COVID-19 who were users of NFVC were age ≥ 60 years (HR = 2.23; 95% CI: 1.21-4.08), presence of arterial hypertension (HR = 1.87; 95% CI: 1.01-3.45), increased work of breathing on hospital admission (HR = 2.38; 95% CI: 1.31-4.35), and a ROX index (iROX) < 3.85 (HR = 1.71; 95% CI: 1.01-2.93).
conclusionsFactors associated with survival were arterial hypertension and iROX < 3.85 with a mortality hazard of 1.5 times, age older than 60 years, and respiratory effort scale at admission WOB ≥ 4 points with more than twice the mortality hazard. The results of this study highlight the importance of early and accurate assessment of risk factors in patients with COVID-19 who use HFNC. Identifying these factors can help clinicians make more informed decisions and prioritize interventions that could potentially improve survival in this group of patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.