[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
November 15, 2016

Error in Abstract

Author Affiliations

Copyright 2016 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.

JAMA. 2016;316(19):2047-2048. doi:10.1001/jama.2016.16337

In the Original Investigation entitled “Effect of Postextubation High-Flow Nasal Cannula vs Noninvasive Ventilation on Reintubation and Postextubation Respiratory Failure in High-Risk Patients: A Randomized Clinical Trial,”1 published online October 5, 2016, and in the October 18, 2016, print issue of JAMA, there was an error in the wording of the second sentence of the abstract’s Results section. The sentence should read as follows: “Sixty-six patients (22.8%) in the high-flow group vs 60 (19.1%) in the NIV group were reintubated (absolute difference, −3.7%; 95% CI, −9.1% to ∞); 78 patients (26.9%) in the high-flow group vs 125 (39.8%) in the NIV group experienced postextubation respiratory failure (risk difference, 12.9%; 95% CI, 6.6% to ∞).” This article was corrected online.

Hernández  G, Vaquero  C, Colinas  L,  et al.  Effect of postextubation high-flow nasal cannula vs noninvasive ventilation on reintubation and postextubation respiratory failure in high-risk patients: a randomized clinical trial.  JAMA. doi:10.1001/jama.2016.14194Google Scholar