Effect of high‐flow nasal oxygen on hypoxaemia during procedural sedation: a systematic review and meta‐analysis
Pooled result · HypoxaemiaResult — go to the resultRelative risk 0.37 95% CI 0.24–0.56Authors' conclusion
In summary, high-flow nasal oxygen compared with conventional oxygenation techniques reduced the risk of hypoxaemia, increased minimum oxygen saturation and reduced the requirement for airway manoeuvres.
Study context
- Population
- Adults and children undergoing procedural sedation19 RCTs (3 in children)
- Participants
- 4,121 adults
- Comparison
- HFNO vs conventional oxygen therapy during procedural sedation
- Outcome
- Hypoxaemia
Methodological detailsGrading of recommendations, assessment, development and evaluation (GRADE), revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool
- GRADE
- Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool
Pooled result
As reported in the abstract
Relative risk
0.37
95% CI 0.24–0.56
P < 0.001
HFNO vs Conventional oxygen therapy
RR 0.37 (95% CI 0.24–0.56); P < 0.001
Further pooled results
| Outcome | RR (95% CI) | P value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Minor airway manoeuvre requirements | 0.26 (0.11–0.59) | P < 0.001 | |
| Procedural interruptions | 0.17 (0.05–0.53) | P = 0.002 | |
| HypercarbiaI2 = 0% | 1.24 (0.97–1.58) | P = 0.09 | |
| 0.050.21520Relative risk (log scale) |
| Outcome | MD (95% CI) | P value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Minimum oxygen saturation | 4.1 (2.70–5.50) | P < 0.001 | |
| −50510Difference (linear scale) |
Hypoxaemia by subgroup (procedure, FiO2, risk profile, propofol administration mode)
- HFNO reduced hypoxaemia regardless of procedure, FiO2, patient risk profile and mode of propofol administration
Original publication
Effect of high‐flow nasal oxygen on hypoxaemia during procedural sedation: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Anaesthesia. Published 31 August 2022. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →