title: Is it time to increase the frequency of use of high-frequency oscillatory ventilation?
abstract: In this issue of Critical Care, Bollen and colleagues present the results of a multicentre randomised controlled trial, comparing high-frequency oscillatory ventilation with conventional ventilation as the primary ventilation mode for adults with acute respiratory distress syndrome. The study was stopped early after recruiting only 61 patients because of declining enrolment, and although no differences were detected in any primary or secondary endpoint, this trial only had sufficient power to detect extreme differences in outcomes between groups. This editorial attempts to put these results in context with previous work and highlights challenges to be addressed in future studies.
authors.affiliation: Interdepartmental Division of Critical Care Medicine, and Department of Medicine, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
authors.forename: Jeffrey M
authors.initials: JM
authors.lastname: Singh
authors.forename: Niall D
authors.initials: ND
authors.lastname: Ferguson
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D006612:High-Frequency Ventilation / Q000379:methods / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D006801:Humans; D007231:Infant, Newborn; D018579:Patient Selection; D012128:Respiratory Distress Syndrome / Q000628:therapy*; D012127:Respiratory Distress Syndrome, Newborn / Q000628:therapy; D016019:Survival Analysis; D016896:Treatment Outcome