Correction: Expanding the utility of the ROX index among patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0261234.].

Expanding the utility of the ROX index among patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure.

BACKGROUND: Delaying intubation in patients who fail high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) may result in increased mortality. The ROX index has been validated to predict HFNC failure among pneumonia patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF), but little information is available for non-pneumonia causes. In this study, we validate the ROX index among AHRF patients due to both pneumonia or non-pneumonia causes, focusing on early prediction. METHODS: This was a retrospective observational study in eight Singapore intensive care units from 1 January 2015 to 30 September 2017. All patients >18 years who were treated with HFNC for AHRF were eligible and recruited. Clinical parameters and arterial blood gas values at HFNC initiation and one hour were recorded. HFNC failure was defined as requiring intubation post-HFNC initiation. RESULTS: HFNC was used in 483 patients with 185 (38.3%) failing HFNC. Among pneumonia patients, the ROX index was most discriminatory in pneumonia patients one hour after HFNC initiation [AUC 0.71 (95% CI 0.64-0.79)], with a threshold value of <6.06 at one hour predicting HFNC failure (sensitivity 51%, specificity 80%, positive predictive value 61%, negative predictive value 73%). The discriminatory power remained moderate among pneumonia patients upon HFNC initiation [AUC 0.65 (95% CI 0.57-0.72)], non-pneumonia patients at HFNC initiation [AUC 0.62 (95% CI 0.55-0.69)] and one hour later [AUC 0.63 (95% CI 0.56-0.70)]. CONCLUSION: The ROX index demonstrated moderate discriminatory power among patients with either pneumonia or non-pneumonia-related AHRF at HFNC initiation and one hour later.

High-flow nasal cannula therapy: A multicentred survey of the practices among physicians and respiratory therapists in Singapore.

BACKGROUND: Use of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) has become a regular intervention in the intensive care units especially in patients coming in with hypoxaemic respiratory failure. Clinical practices may differ from published literature. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to determine the clinical practices of physicians and respiratory therapists (RTs) on the use of HFNC. METHODS: A retrospective observational study looking at medical records on HFNC usage from January 2015 to September 2017 was performed and was followed by a series of questions related to HFNC practices. The survey involved physicians and RTs in intensive care units from multiple centres in Singapore from January to April 2018. Indications and thresholds for HFNC usage with titration and weaning practices were compared with the retrospective observational study data. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-three recipients (69.9%) responded to the survey and reported postextubation (87.8%), pneumonia in nonimmunocompromised (65.9%), and pneumonia in immunocompromised (61.8%) patients as the top three indications for HFNC. Of all, 39.8% of respondents wanted to use HFNC for palliative intent. Similar practices were observed in the retrospective study with the large cohort of 63% patients (483 of the total 768 patients) where HFNC was used for acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure and 274 (35.7%) patients to facilitate extubation. The survey suggested that respondents would initiate HFNC at a lower fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2), higher partial pressure of oxygen to FiO2 ratio, and higher oxygen saturation to FiO2 ratio for nonpneumonia patients than patients with pneumonia. RTs were less likely to start HFNC for patients suffering from pneumonia and interstitial lung disease than physicians. RTs also preferred adjustment of FiO2 to improve oxygen saturations and noninvasive ventilation for rescue. CONCLUSIONS: Among the different intensive care units surveyed, the indications and thresholds for the initiation of HFNC differed in the clinical practices of physicians and RTs.

Predictors and outcomes of high-flow nasal cannula failure following extubation: A multicentre observational study.

INTRODUCTION: Despite adhering to criteria for extubation, up to 20% of intensive care patients require re-intubation, even with use of post-extubation high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC). This study aims to identify independent predictors and outcomes of extubation failure in patients who failed post-extubation HFNC. METHODS: We conducted a multicentre observational study involving 9 adult intensive care units (ICUs) across 5 public hospitals in Singapore. We included patients extubated to HFNC following spontaneous breathing trials. We compared patients who were successfully weaned off HFNC with those who failed HFNC (defined as re-intubation ≤7 days following extubation). Generalised additive logistic regression analysis was used to identify independent risk factors for failed HFNC. RESULTS: Among 244 patients (mean age: 63.92±15.51 years, 65.2% male, median APACHE II score 23.55±7.35), 41 (16.8%) failed HFNC; hypoxia, hypercapnia and excessive secretions were primary reasons. Stroke was an independent predictor of HFNC failure (odds ratio 2.48, 95% confidence interval 1.83-3.37). Failed HFNC, as compared to successful HFNC, was associated with increased median ICU length of stay (14 versus 7 days, P<0.001), ICU mortality (14.6% versus 2.0%, P<0.001) and hospital mortality (29.3% versus 12.3%, P=0.006). CONCLUSION: Post-extubation HFNC failure, especially in patients with stroke as a comorbidity, remains a clinical challenge and predicts poorer clinical outcomes. Our observational study highlights the need for future prospective trials to better identify patients at high risk of post-extubation HFNC failure.