ObjectiveTo compare the effects of different airway humidification methods for patients with artificial airway offline. MethodsOne hundred and fifty-five critically ill patients with artificial airway who did not need mechanical ventilation for more than 72 h, admitted in the Affiliated Hospital to Armed Police Logistics College between January 2012 and December 2012, were recruited in the study.They were randomly divided into 3 groups to receive different airway humidification treatment, ie.MR410 device for group A, MR850 device for group B, AIRVO2 device for group C.PaO2, SpO2, heart rate, and breathing frequency were measured after 72 h.The Airway Scoring System was used for evaluation of sputum viscosity.The time of pulmonary infection control was also recorded. ResultsThere were no significant differences in gender, age, underlying diseases, duration of artificial airway, and APACHEⅡscore among three groups (P > 0.05).There were significant differences in respiratory frequency, PaO2, SpO2, heart rate, sputum viscosity, humidification effect, lung infection control time among three groups (P < 0.05), with group C better than group A and B in above parameters. ConclusionsCompared with MR410 and MR850 humidification devices, AIRVO2 is a more ideal device for airway humidification, and is more suitable for patients with artificial airway offline.