Predictors of Intubation in Patients With Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure Treated With a Noninvasive Oxygenation Strategy*
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: In patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure, noninvasive ventilation and high-flow nasal cannula oxygen are alternative strategies to conventional oxygen therapy. Endotracheal intubation is frequently needed in these patients with a risk of delay, and early predictors of failure may help clinicians to decide early. We aimed to identify factors associated with intubation in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure treated with different noninvasive oxygenation techniques. DESIGN: Post hoc analysis of a randomized clinical trial. SETTING: Twenty-three ICUs. PATIENTS: Patients with a respiratory rate greater than 25 breaths/min and a PaO2/FIO2 ratio less than or equal to 300 mm Hg. INTERVENTION: Patients were treated with standard oxygen, high-flow nasal cannula oxygen, or noninvasive ventilation. MEASUREMENT AND MAIN RESULTS: Respiratory variables one hour after treatment initiation. Under standard oxygen, patients with a respiratory rate greater than or equal to 30 breaths/min were more likely to need intubation (odds ratio, 2.76; 95% CI, 1.13-6.75; p = 0.03). One hour after high-flow nasal cannula oxygen initiation, increased heart rate was the only factor associated with intubation. One hour after noninvasive ventilation initiation, a PaO2/FIO2 ratio less than or equal to 200 mm Hg and a tidal volume greater than 9 mL/kg of predicted body weight were independent predictors of intubation (adjusted odds ratio, 4.26; 95% CI, 1.62-11.16; p = 0.003 and adjusted odds ratio, 3.14; 95% CI, 1.22-8.06; p = 0.02, respectively). A tidal volume above 9 mL/kg during noninvasive ventilation remained independently associated with 90-day mortality. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure breathing spontaneously, the respiratory rate was a predictor of intubation under standard oxygen, but not under high-flow nasal cannula oxygen or noninvasive ventilation. A PaO2/FIO2 below 200 mm Hg and a high tidal volume greater than 9 mL/kg were the two strong predictors of intubation under noninvasive ventilation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".