Comparison of high-flow nasal oxygen cannula therapy versus a standard oxygen face mask in patients with hypostatic pneumonia.

OBJECTIVE

We assessed the clinical effects of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) oxygen therapy and a standard oxygen atomizer mask on the respiratory tract in patients with hypostatic pneumonia.

METHODS

We included patients with hypostatic pneumonia in this retrospective cohort study. Patients were provided continuous airway humidification by continuous oxygen atomization using either an HFNC or standard oxygen mask. Arterial blood gas analysis, the dyspnea score, inflammatory-related parameters, and adverse events of patients in the two groups were compared.

RESULTS

Fifty-five patients had HFNC delivery and 57 had a standard oxygen atomizer mask. After 7 days of treatment, patients in the HFNC group had a higher partial pressure of arterial blood oxygen/fraction of inspired oxygen ratio (268.12±28.44 vs 238.28±30.04) and lower partial pressure of arterial blood carbon dioxide (38.02±8.84 vs 49.27±7.84 mmHg) than those in the standard oxygen mask group. The dyspnea score and inflammatory-related parameters in the HFNC group were significantly lower than those in the standard oxygen mask group. The incidence of adverse events was lower in the HFNC group than in the standard oxygen mask group.

CONCLUSION

HFNC therapy relieves clinical symptoms more quickly than a standard oxygen mask and reduces the incidence of adverse events.