Activity ID
11397Expires
December 21, 2024Format Type
Journal-basedCME Credit
1Fee
$30CME Provider: JAMA
Description of CME Course
Importance The effect of high-flow oxygen therapy vs conventional oxygen therapy has not been established in the setting of severe COVID-19.
Objective To determine the effect of high-flow oxygen therapy through a nasal cannula compared with conventional oxygen therapy on need for endotracheal intubation and clinical recovery in severe COVID-19.
Design, Setting, and Participants Randomized, open-label clinical trial conducted in emergency and intensive care units in 3 hospitals in Colombia. A total of 220 adults with respiratory distress and a ratio of partial pressure of arterial oxygen to fraction of inspired oxygen of less than 200 due to COVID-19 were randomized from August 2020 to January 2021, with last follow-up on February 10, 2021.
Interventions Patients were randomly assigned to receive high-flow oxygen through a nasal cannula (n = 109) or conventional oxygen therapy (n = 111).
Main Outcomes and Measures The co–primary outcomes were need for intubation and time to clinical recovery until day 28 as assessed by a 7-category ordinal scale (range, 1-7, with higher scores indicating a worse condition). Effects of treatments were calculated with a Cox proportional hazards model adjusted for hypoxemia severity, age, and comorbidities.
Results Among 220 randomized patients, 199 were included in the analysis (median age, 60 years; n = 65 women [32.7%]). Intubation occurred in 34 (34.3%) randomized to high-flow oxygen therapy and in 51 (51.0%) randomized to conventional oxygen therapy (hazard ratio, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.39-0.96; P = .03). The median time to clinical recovery within 28 days was 11 (IQR, 9-14) days in patients randomized to high-flow oxygen therapy vs 14 (IQR, 11-19) days in those randomized to conventional oxygen therapy (hazard ratio, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.00-1.92; P = .047). Suspected bacterial pneumonia occurred in 13 patients (13.1%) randomized to high-flow oxygen and in 17 (17.0%) of those randomized to conventional oxygen therapy, while bacteremia was detected in 7 (7.1%) vs 11 (11.0%), respectively.
Conclusions and Relevance Among patients with severe COVID-19, use of high-flow oxygen through a nasal cannula significantly decreased need for mechanical ventilation support and time to clinical recovery compared with conventional low-flow oxygen therapy.
Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04609462
Disclaimers
1. This activity is accredited by the American Medical Association.
2. This activity is free to AMA members.
ABMS Member Board Approvals by Type
ABMS Lifelong Learning CME Activity
Allergy and Immunology
Anesthesiology
Colon and Rectal Surgery
Family Medicine
Medical Genetics and Genomics
Nuclear Medicine
Ophthalmology
Orthopaedic Surgery
Pathology
Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
Plastic Surgery
Preventive Medicine
Psychiatry and Neurology
Radiology
Thoracic Surgery
Urology
Commercial Support?
NoNOTE: If a Member Board has not deemed this activity for MOC approval as an accredited CME activity, this activity may count toward an ABMS Member Board’s general CME requirement. Please refer directly to your Member Board’s MOC Part II Lifelong Learning and Self-Assessment Program Requirements.
Educational Objectives
To identify the key insights or developments described in this article
Keywords
Medical Education, Hypertension
Competencies
Medical Knowledge
CME Credit Type
AMA PRA Category 1 Credit
DOI
10.1001/jama.2021.20714