Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 328

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 36 of the 36 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Exhaled air dispersion during high-flow nasal cannula therapy versus CPAP via different masks

Open access
Hui, David S., Chow, Benny K., Lo, Thomas, Tsang, Owen T.Y., Ko, Fanny W., Ng, Susanna S., Gin, Tony, Chan, Matthew T.V.·2019·European Respiratory Journal

Abstract

Background: High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) is an emerging therapy for respiratory failure but the extent of exhaled air dispersion during treatment is unknown. We examined exhaled air dispersion during HFNC therapy versus continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) on a human patient simulator (HPS) in an isolation room with 16 air changes·h−1. Methods: The HPS was programmed to represent different severity of lung injury. CPAP was delivered at 5–20 cmH 2 O via nasal pillows (Respironics Nuance Pro Gel or ResMed Swift FX) or an oronasal mask (ResMed Quattro Air). HFNC, humidified to 37°C, was delivered at 10–60 L·min−1 to the HPS. Exhaled airflow was marked with intrapulmonary smoke for visualisation and revealed by laser light-sheet. Normalised exhaled air concentration was estimated from the light scattered by the smoke particles. Significant exposure was defined when there was ≥20% normalised smoke concentration. Results: In the normal lung condition, mean±sd exhaled air dispersion, along the sagittal plane, increased from 186±34 to 264±27 mm and from 207±11 to 332±34 mm when CPAP was increased from 5 to 20 cmH 2 O via Respironics and ResMed nasal pillows, respectively. Leakage from the oronasal mask was negligible. Mean±sd exhaled air distances increased from 65±15 to 172±33 mm when HFNC was increased from 10 to 60 L·min−1. Air leakage to 620 mm occurred laterally when HFNC and the interface tube became loose. Conclusion: Exhaled air dispersion during HFNC and CPAP via different interfaces is limited provided there is good mask interface fitting.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1183/13993003.02339-2018

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 36 references

Cited by

See all 328

Metadata

Authors
Hui, D. S., Chow, B. K., Lo, T., Tsang, O. T. Y., Ko, F. W., Ng, S. S., Gin, T., & Chan, M. T. V.
Venue
European Respiratory Journal
Published
2019-01-31
Volume
53
Issue
4
Pages
1802339
ISSN
  • 0903-1936 (ISSN-L)
  • 1399-3003
OpenAlex
W2914546156
Cited by
328
References
36
FWCI
46.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Exhaled air dispersion during high-flow nasal cannula therapy versus CPAP via different masks. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1183/13993003.02339-2018
The paper
Hui, D. S., Chow, B. K., Lo, T., Tsang, O. T. Y., Ko, F. W., Ng, S. S., Gin, T., & Chan, M. T. V. (2019). Exhaled air dispersion during high-flow nasal cannula therapy versus CPAP via different masks. European Respiratory Journal. https://doi.org/10.1183/13993003.02339-2018

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.