Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Effect of Early High-Flow Nasal Oxygen vs Standard Oxygen Therapy on Length of Hospital Stay in Hospitalized Children With Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure: The PARIS-2 Randomized Clinical Trial

  • Donna Franklin
  • , Franz E. Babl
  • , Shane George
  • , Ed Oakley
  • , Meredith L. Borland
  • , Jocelyn Neutze
  • , Jason Acworth
  • , Simon Craig
  • , Mark Jones
  • , Brenda Gannon
  • , Deborah Shellshear
  • , Hamish McCay
  • , Alexandra Wallace
  • , Tobias Hoeppner
  • , Mark Wildman
  • , Joerg Mattes
  • , Trang M.T. Pham
  • , Letitia Miller
  • , Amanda Williams
  • , Sharon O'Brien
  • Shirley Lawrence, Megan Bonisch, Kristen Gibbons, Susan Moloney, John Waugh, Sue Hobbins, Simon Grew, Rose Fahy, Stuart R. Dalziel, Andreas Schibler

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

Abstract

Importance: Nasal high-flow oxygen therapy in infants with bronchiolitis and hypoxia has been shown to reduce the requirement to escalate care. The efficacy of high-flow oxygen therapy in children aged 1 to 4 years with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure without bronchiolitis is unknown. 

Objective: To determine the effect of early high-flow oxygen therapy vs standard oxygen therapy in children with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. 

Design, Setting, and Participants: A multicenter, randomized clinical trial was conducted at 14 metropolitan and tertiary hospitals in Australia and New Zealand, including 1567 children aged 1 to 4 years (randomized between December 18, 2017, and March 18, 2020) requiring hospital admission for acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. The last participant follow-up was completed on March 22, 2020. 

Interventions: Enrolled children were randomly allocated 1:1 to high-flow oxygen therapy (n = 753) or standard oxygen therapy (n = 764). The type of oxygen therapy could not be masked, but the investigators remained blinded until the outcome data were locked. 

Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was length of hospital stay with the hypothesis that high-flow oxygen therapy reduces length of stay. There were 9 secondary outcomes, including length of oxygen therapy and admission to the intensive care unit. Children were analyzed according to their randomization group. 

Results: Of the 1567 children who were randomized, 1517 (97%) were included in the primary analysis (median age, 1.9 years [IQR, 1.4-3.0 years]; 732 [46.7%] were female) and all children completed the trial. The length of hospital stay was significantly longer in the high-flow oxygen group with a median of 1.77 days (IQR, 1.03-2.80 days) vs 1.50 days (IQR, 0.85-2.44 days) in the standard oxygen group (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.75-0.92]; P < .001). Of the 9 prespecified secondary outcomes, 4 showed no significant difference. The median length of oxygen therapy was 1.07 days (IQR, 0.50-2.06 days) in the high-flow oxygen group vs 0.75 days (IQR, 0.35-1.61 days) in the standard oxygen therapy group (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.70-0.86]). In the high-flow oxygen group, there were 94 admissions (12.5%) to the intensive care unit compared with 53 admissions (6.9%) in the standard oxygen group (adjusted odds ratio, 1.93 [95% CI, 1.35-2.75]). There was only 1 death and it occurred in the high-flow oxygen group. 

Conclusions and Relevance: Nasal high-flow oxygen used as the initial primary therapy in children aged 1 to 4 years with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure did not significantly reduce the length of hospital stay compared with standard oxygen therapy. 

Trial Registration: anzctr.org.au Identifier: ACTRN12618000210279.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)224-234
Number of pages11
JournalJAMA
Volume329
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 17 Jan 2023

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Effect of Early High-Flow Nasal Oxygen vs Standard Oxygen Therapy on Length of Hospital Stay in Hospitalized Children With Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure: The PARIS-2 Randomized Clinical Trial'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this