High-flow nasal cannula implementation has not reduced intubation rates for bronchiolitis in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Bronchiolitis is the most common reason for admission to hospital in the first year of life, with increasing hospitalization rates in Canada. Respiratory support with high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) is being routinely used in paediatric centres, though the evidence of efficacy is continuing to be evaluated. We examined the impact of HFNC on intubation rates, hospital and paediatric critical care unit (PCCU) length of stay (LOS), and PCCU admission rates in paediatric tertiary centres in Canada. METHODS: We conducted a multicentre, interrupted time series analysis to examine intubation rates pre- to postimplementation of HFNC for bronchiolitis. Data were obtained from the Canadian Institute for Health Information database. Paediatric tertiary centres that introduced HFNC between 2009 and 2014 were included, and data were collected from April 2005 to March 2017. RESULTS: A total of 17,643 patients met inclusion criteria. There was no significant change in intubation rates after the introduction of HFNC. There was a significant increase in PCCU admission, with a decrease in the PCCU LOS following the introduction of HFNC. There was no significant change in average hospital LOS after HFNC was introduced. CONCLUSIONS: This study adds to the evolving evidence showing that overall disease course is not modified by the use of HFNC. The initiation of HFNC in Canadian paediatric centres resulted in no significant change in intubation rates or average LOS in hospital, but had an increase in PCCU admissions. Careful monitoring of new technologies on their clinical impact as well as health care resource utilization is warranted.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".