Prone position for acute respiratory failure in adults

A Comprehensive Review of Prone Ventilation in the Intensive Care Unit: Challenges and Solutions

This comprehensive review explores the intricate landscape of prone ventilation in the intensive care unit (ICU), spanning physiological rationale, challenges in implementation, psychosocial impacts, technological innovations, economic considerations, barriers to adoption, and implications for clinical practice. The physiological benefits of prone positioning, including improved oxygenation and lung compliance, are discussed alongside the challenges of patient selection and technical complexities. The psychosocial impact on patients and caregivers, as well as the economic implications for healthcare systems, adds a crucial dimension to the analysis. The review also delves into innovative technologies, such as advanced monitoring and automation, shaping the landscape of prone ventilation. Moreover, it addresses the barriers to widespread adoption and outlines strategies to overcome resistance, emphasizing the need for a comprehensive and collaborative approach. The implications for clinical practice underscore the importance of evidence-based guidelines, ongoing education, and a holistic patient-centered care approach. The conclusion highlights the call to action for further research to refine protocols and technology, ultimately optimizing the application of prone ventilation in critical care settings.

Construction of nursing-sensitive quality indicators for the care of patients with prone position ventilation using the Delphi method

BACKGROUND

Prone position ventilation (PPV) has gradually become an adjuvant treatment to improve oxygenation in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome. Scientific and comprehensive evaluation of the quality of nursing care for patients with PPV is of great significance to ensure the effectiveness of treatment and patient safety. However, there are no established objective indicators for evaluating the quality of nursing care for patients with PPV. This study intended to identify a set of scientific, systematic and clinically applicable nursing-sensitive quality indicators for the care of patients with PPV.

METHODS

Based on the Donabedian structure-process-result theory model, the quality evaluation indicators of nursing care for patients with PPV were preliminarily constructed based on an evidence-based perspective, and two rounds of Delphi surveys were conducted with the purpose of collecting opinions from a panel of independent experts.

RESULTS

The questionnaire recovery rates of the two rounds of correspondence were 100.00% and 95.00%, the recovery rates of expert opinions were 80.00% and 26.32%, the expert authority coefficient values were 0.89, and the Kendall coordination coefficient W values were 0.110 and 0.133, respectively. The final nursing-sensitive quality indicators for the care of patients with PPV included 3 first-level indicators, 9 s-level indicators and 29 third-level indicators.

CONCLUSION

The constructed nursing-sensitive quality indicators for the care of patients with PPV involve quality supervision during the whole process of PPV from three dimensions: structure, process and results. These indicators have strong operability, reliability, practicability and scientificity and can provide a reference for the quality evaluation and monitoring of nursing care for patients with PPV.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING MANAGEMENT

The quality indicators of nursing care for patients with PPV constructed in this research are scientific and reliable, and the content of the quality indicators can better reflect the technical characteristics of special nursing. Nursing managers are encouraged to use these quality indicators to evaluate the quality of clinical nursing care and improve safety for patients with PPV.

Strategies to preventing pressure injuries among intensive care unit patients mechanically ventilated in prone position: a systematic review and a Delphi study

Background

Although the incidence of pressure injury in the prone position is high for the mechanically ventilated patients in the intensive care unit, evidence-based strategies are still lacking.

Propose

To conduct a systematic review of current evidence, and to propose a series of strategies to prevent pressure injuries among mechanically ventilated patients with prone position in the intensive care unit.

Methods

The study was guided by the Medical Research Council framework. After a systematic review of current evidence of original articles, guidelines, expert consensus and theories, a strategy draft was developed. Then we invited 20 experts to modify and refine these strategies through two rounds of Delphi consensus method.

Results

After two rounds of Delphi process, the importance of coefficient of variation (Cv) and Kendall's coefficient of concordance in the strategies repository were 0.067 and 0.311, respectively. And the operability of Cv and Kendall's coefficient of concordance in the strategy draft was 0.055 and 0.294, respectively. Ultimately, we established 31 strategies for including 7 themes (assess risk factors, assess skin and tissue, body position management, skin care, nutrition, preventing medical device-related pressure injuries, education and supervision). In addition, we also developed a strategy framework to clarify our strategies.

Conclusion

According to the Medical Research Council framework, we developed 7 themes and 31 strategies to prevention prone-position pressure injuries among the intensive care unit mechanically ventilated patients. This study was considered to improve the clinical management of pressure injuries among prone position patients in the intensive care unit settings.

Clinical Outcomes of Routine Awake Prone Positioning in COVID-19 Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Before coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) emerged, proning had been demonstrated to improve oxygenation in those with acute hypoxic respiratory failure and be performed in non-intensive care settings. This benefit was further exemplified by the COVID-19 pandemic, leading to awake prone positioning (APP). We assessed the efficacy of routine APP versus standard care in preventing death and invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) in non-intubated hypoxic COVID-19 patients. PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and medRxiv databases were used from January 1st, 2020, to January 15th, 2022, to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Routine APP group were encouraged to be self-prone, whereas the standard care group received care according to local clinical practice and allowed APP crossover as rescue therapy. We included eight COVID-19 RCTs assessing 809 APP vs. 822 standard care patients. APP group had less IMV requirement (26.5% vs. 30.9%; OR - odds ratio 0.77; P=0.03) than the standard care group, with subgroup analysis showing greater benefit (32.5% vs. 39.1%; OR 0.75; P=0.02) for those mainly requiring oxygen support of non-invasive mechanical ventilation (NIMV) and high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC). The time to IMV initiation was similar (mean 8.3 vs. 10.0 days; P=0.66) for patients requiring NIMV and HFNC. Patients mainly receiving supplemental oxygen and non-rebreather masks had improved oxygenation parameters, although not statistically significant. Other outcomes involving all-cause hospital mortality, hospital and ICU (intensive care unit) length of stay, and adverse events were comparable. APP appeared to be an important modality for reducing IMV requirements, especially in those requiring NIMV and HFNC.

Use of mechanical insufflation exsufflation and manual techniques in an intubated adult with COVID-19 positioned in prone-A case study

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The therapeutic benefits of prone positioning have been described over the last 50 years culminating in a systematic review supporting this management strategy for patients with severe hypoxaemic respiratory failure. Early work detailing treatment approaches for COVID-19 have advocated the use of prone positioning. Limited data exists regarding physiotherapy intervention in patients with COVID-19 owing to the recent emergence of this novel disease. Despite the acknowledged beneficial effects of physiotherapy on secretion clearance and lung recruitment in the general critical care population, there is a lack of evidence pertaining to physiotherapeutic intervention for acutely unwell intubated adults in prone lying.

METHODS

This case study report follows the CARE case report guidelines. One patient with COVID-19 pneumonitis who underwent physiotherapy intervention in prone lying is discussed. Informed consent was gained from next of kin for data to be published.

RESULTS

Treatment techniques including mechanical insufflation-exsufflation in prone were feasible and well tolerated by this patient with only transient adverse effects noted. Treatment techniques assisted with secretion clearance.

DISCUSSION

Further work on safety, feasibility, and efficacy of physiotherapy intervention in patients with and without COVID-19 in prone will contribute to the evidence base on this subject.

Positioning for acute respiratory distress in hospitalised infants and children

BACKGROUND

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a significant cause of hospitalisation and death in young children. Positioning and mechanical ventilation have been regularly used to reduce respiratory distress and improve oxygenation in hospitalised patients. Due to the association of prone positioning (lying on the abdomen) with sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) within the first six months, it is recommended that young infants be placed on their back (supine). However, prone positioning may be a non-invasive way of increasing oxygenation in individuals with acute respiratory distress, and offers a more significant survival advantage in those who are mechanically ventilated. There are substantial differences in respiratory mechanics between adults and infants. While the respiratory tract undergoes significant development within the first two years of life, differences in airway physiology between adults and children become less prominent by six to eight years old. However, there is a reduced risk of SIDS during artificial ventilation in hospitalised infants. Thus, an updated review focusing on positioning for infants and young children with ARDS is warranted. This is an update of a review published in 2005, 2009, and 2012.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of different body positions in hospitalised infants and children with acute respiratory distress syndrome aged between four weeks and 16 years.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, which contains the Acute Respiratory Infections Group's Specialised Register, MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL from January 2004 to July 2021.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs comparing two or more positions for the management of infants and children hospitalised with ARDS.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data from each study. We resolved differences by consensus, or referred to a third contributor to arbitrate. We analysed bivariate outcomes using an odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). We analysed continuous outcomes using a mean difference (MD) and 95% CI. We used a fixed-effect model, unless heterogeneity was significant (I² statistic > 50%), when we used a random-effects model.

MAIN RESULTS

We included six trials: four cross-over trials, and two parallel randomised trials, with 198 participants aged between 4 weeks and 16 years, all but 15 of whom were mechanically ventilated. Four trials compared prone to supine positions. One trial compared the prone position to good-lung dependent (where the person lies on the side of the healthy lung, e.g. if the right lung was healthy, they were made to lie on the right side), and independent (or non-good-lung independent, where the person lies on the opposite side to the healthy lung, e.g. if the right lung was healthy, they were made to lie on the left side) position. One trial compared good-lung independent to good-lung dependent positions. When the prone (with ventilators) and supine positions were compared, there was no information on episodes of apnoea or mortality due to respiratory events. There was no conclusive result in oxygen saturation (SaO_2; MD 0.40 mmHg, 95% CI -1.22 to 2.66; 1 trial, 30 participants; very low certainty evidence); blood gases, PCO₂ (MD 3.0 mmHg, 95% CI -1.93 to 7.93; 1 trial, 99 participants; low certainty evidence), or PO₂ (MD 2 mmHg, 95% CI -5.29 to 9.29; 1 trial, 99 participants; low certainty evidence); or lung function (PaO₂/FiO₂ ratio; MD 28.16 mmHg, 95% CI -9.92 to 66.24; 2 trials, 121 participants; very low certainty evidence). However, there was an improvement in oxygenation index (FiO₂% X M_PAW/ PaO₂) with prone positioning in both the parallel trials (MD -2.42, 95% CI -3.60 to -1.25; 2 trials, 121 participants; very low certainty evidence), and the cross-over study (MD -8.13, 95% CI -15.01 to -1.25; 1 study, 20 participants). Derived indices of respiratory mechanics, such as tidal volume, respiratory rate, and positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) were reported. There was an apparent decrease in tidal volume between prone and supine groups in a parallel study (MD -0.60, 95% CI -1.05 to -0.15; 1 study, 84 participants; very low certainty evidence). When prone and supine positions were compared in a cross-over study, there were no conclusive results in respiratory compliance (MD 0.07, 95% CI -0.10 to 0.24; 1 study, 10 participants); changes in PEEP (MD -0.70 cm H₂O, 95% CI -2.72 to 1.32; 1 study, 10 participants); or resistance (MD -0.00, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.04; 1 study, 10 participants). One study reported adverse events. There were no conclusive results for potential harm between groups in extubation (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.13 to 2.54; 1 trial, 102 participants; very low certainty evidence); obstructions of the endotracheal tube (OR 5.20, 95% CI 0.24 to 111.09; 1 trial, 102 participants; very low certainty evidence); pressure ulcers (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.41 to 2.44; 1 trial, 102 participants; very low certainty evidence); and hypercapnia (high levels of arterial carbon dioxide; OR 3.06, 95% CI 0.12 to 76.88; 1 trial, 102 participants; very low certainty evidence). One study (50 participants) compared supine positions to good-lung dependent and independent positions. There was no conclusive evidence that PaO₂ was different between supine and good-lung dependent positioning (MD 3.44 mm Hg, 95% CI -23.12 to 30.00; 1 trial, 25 participants; very low certainty evidence). There was also no conclusive evidence for supine position and good-lung independent positioning (MD -2.78 mmHg, 95% CI -28.84, 23.28; 25 participants; very low certainty evidence); or between good-lung dependent and independent positioning (MD 6.22, 95% CI -21.25 to 33.69; 1 trial, 25 participants; very low certainty evidence). As most trials did not describe how possible biases were addressed, the potential for bias in these findings is unclear.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Although included studies suggest that prone positioning may offer some advantage, there was little evidence to make definitive recommendations. There appears to be low certainty evidence that positioning improves oxygenation in mechanically ventilated children with ARDS. Due to the increased risk of SIDS with prone positioning and lung injury with artificial ventilation, it is recommended that hospitalised infants and children should only be placed in this position while under continuous cardiorespiratory monitoring.

Prone positioning of patients with moderate hypoxaemia due to covid-19: multicentre pragmatic randomised trial (COVID-PRONE)

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of prone positioning to reduce the risk of death or respiratory failure in non-critically ill patients admitted to hospital with covid-19.

DESIGN

Multicentre pragmatic randomised clinical trial.

SETTING

15 hospitals in Canada and the United States from May 2020 until May 2021.

PARTICIPANTS

Eligible patients had a laboratory confirmed or a clinically highly suspected diagnosis of covid-19, needed supplemental oxygen (up to 50% fraction of inspired oxygen), and were able to independently lie prone with verbal instruction. Of the 570 patients who were assessed for eligibility, 257 were randomised and 248 were included in the analysis.

INTERVENTION

Patients were randomised 1:1 to prone positioning (that is, instructing a patient to lie on their stomach while they are in bed) or standard of care (that is, no instruction to adopt prone position).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was a composite of in-hospital death, mechanical ventilation, or worsening respiratory failure defined as needing at least 60% fraction of inspired oxygen for at least 24 hours. Secondary outcomes included the change in the ratio of oxygen saturation to fraction of inspired oxygen.

RESULTS

The trial was stopped early on the basis of futility for the pre-specified primary outcome. The median time from hospital admission until randomisation was 1 day, the median age of patients was 56 (interquartile range 45-65) years, 89 (36%) patients were female, and 222 (90%) were receiving oxygen via nasal prongs at the time of randomisation. The median time spent prone in the first 72 hours was 6 (1.5-12.8) hours in total for the prone arm compared with 0 (0-2) hours in the control arm. The risk of the primary outcome was similar between the prone group (18 (14%) events) and the standard care group (17 (14%) events) (odds ratio 0.92, 95% confidence interval 0.44 to 1.92). The change in the ratio of oxygen saturation to fraction of inspired oxygen after 72 hours was similar for patients randomised to prone positioning and standard of care.

CONCLUSION

Among non-critically ill patients with hypoxaemia who were admitted to hospital with covid-19, a multifaceted intervention to increase prone positioning did not improve outcomes. However, wide confidence intervals preclude definitively ruling out benefit or harm. Adherence to prone positioning was poor, despite multiple efforts to increase it. Subsequent trials of prone positioning should aim to develop strategies to improve adherence to awake prone positioning.

STUDY REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04383613.

Characteristics, treatment, and nursing care of patients infected by Sars-CoV-2 hospitalized in intensive care units: multicenter study of colombian hospitals

OBJECTIVES

To describe the clinical characteristics, treatment, evolution, and nursing care of adult patients with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome who were positive for SARS-CoV-2 and hospitalized in intensive care units (ICUs) during the first peak of the pandemic in Colombia, 2020.

METHODS

Multicenter descriptive study of four high-complexity hospitals in Colombia, which included 473 consecutive adult patients admitted to intensive care units with a confirmed diagnosis of SARS CoV-2. Sociodemographic and clinical information - comorbidities, treatment and evolution - and nursing care provided were included.

RESULTS

Of the patients included, 43.7% died, 88.8% had pneumonia, and 60.2% developed respiratory distress syndrome. Most of those who died were men. Those who died had a median age of 68.4 years and a higher frequency of comorbidities (hypertension, cardiovascular disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and higher body mass index). They were admitted to the ICU with higher rate of dyspnea, lower oxygen saturation, and higher score of multiorgan failure. They also more often required mechanical ventilation and pronation therapy and were given more vasopressors and renal replacement therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

People with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome due to COVID-19 who were hospitalized in the ICU had a high risk of death, especially older patients; males; those with cardiovascular, respiratory, and hypertension comorbidities; those who needed mechanical ventilation; and those with an elevated SOFA score. The nursing care of these critically ill patients focused on respiratory care and the prevention of associated complications.

Are there differences between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 inpatient pressure injuries? Experiences in Internal Medicine Units

Background

Pressure Injuries (PIs) are major worldwide public health threats within the different health-care settings.

Objective

To describe and compare epidemiological and clinical features of PIs in COVID-19 patients and patients admitted for other causes in Internal Medicine Units during the first wave of COVID-19 pandemic.

Design

A descriptive longitudinal retrospective study.

Setting

This study was conducted in Internal Medicine Units in Salamanca University Hospital Complex, a tertiary hospital in the Salamanca province, Spain.

Participants

All inpatients ≥18-year-old admitted from March 1, 2020 to June 1, 2020 for more than 24 hours in the Internal Medicine Units with one or more episodes of PIs.

Results

A total of 101 inpatients and 171 episodes were studied. The prevalence of PI episodes was 6% and the cumulative incidence was 2.9% during the first-wave of COVID-19. Risk of acute wounds was four times higher in the COVID-19 patient group (p<0.001). Most common locations were sacrum and heels. Among hospital acquired pressure injuries a significant association was observed between arterial hypertension and diabetes mellitus in patients with COVID-19 diagnosis.

Conclusion

During the first wave of COVID-19, COVID-19 patients tend to present a higher number of acute wounds, mainly of hospital origin, compared to the profile of the non-COVID group. Diabetes mellitus and arterial hypertension were identified as main associated comorbidities in patients with COVID-19 diagnosis.

The Application of Awake-Prone Positioning Among Non-intubated Patients With COVID-19-Related ARDS: A Narrative Review

The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has significantly increased the number of patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), necessitating respiratory support. This strain on intensive care unit (ICU) resources forces clinicians to limit the use of mechanical ventilation by seeking novel therapeutic strategies. Awake-prone positioning appears to be a safe and tolerable intervention for non-intubated patients with hypoxemic respiratory failure. Meanwhile, several observational studies and meta-analyses have reported the early use of prone positioning in awake patients with COVID-19-related ARDS (C-ARDS) for improving oxygenation levels and preventing ICU transfers. Indeed, some international guidelines have recommended the early application of awake-prone positioning in patients with hypoxemic respiratory failure attributable to C-ARDS. However, its effectiveness in reducing intubation rate, mortality, applied timing, and optimal duration is unclear. High-quality evidence of awake-prone positioning for hypoxemic patients with COVID-19 is still lacking. Therefore, this article provides an update on the current state of published literature about the physiological rationale, effect, timing, duration, and populations that might benefit from awake proning. Moreover, the risks and adverse effects of awake-prone positioning were also investigated. This work will guide future studies and aid clinicians in deciding on better treatment plans.

Prone position plexopathy: an avoidable complication of prone positioning for COVID-19 pneumonitis?

Prone positioning is a mainstay of management for those presenting to the intensive care unit with moderate-to-severe acute respiratory distress syndrome due to COVID-19. While this is a necessary and life-saving intervention in selected patients, careful positioning and meticulous care are required to prevent compression and traction of the brachial plexus, and resultant brachial plexopathy. We describe two patients who developed a brachial plexus injury while undergoing prone positioning for management of COVID-19 pneumonitis. Both patients were diabetic and underwent prolonged periods in the prone position during which the plexopathy affected arm was abducted for 19 and 55 hours, respectively. We discuss strategies to reduce the risk of this rare but potentially disabling complication of prone positioning.

Adverse Events of Prone Positioning in Mechanically Ventilated Adults With ARDS

BACKGROUND

Prone positioning is a therapy utilized globally to improve gas exchange, minimize ventilator-induced lung injury, and reduce mortality in ARDS, particularly during the ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Whereas the respiratory benefits of prone positioning in ARDS have been accepted, the concurrent complications could be undervalued. Therefore, this study aimed to identify the adverse events (AEs) related to prone positioning in ARDS and, secondarily, to collect strategies and recommendations to mitigate these AEs.

METHODS

In this scoping review, we searched recommendation documents and original studies published between June 2013 and November 2020 from 6 relevant electronic databases and the websites of intensive care societies.

RESULTS

We selected 41 documents from 121 eligible documents, comprising 13 recommendation documents and 28 original studies (involving 1,578 subjects and 994 prone maneuvers). We identified > 40 individual AEs, and the highest-pooled occurrence rates were those of severe desaturation (37.9%), barotrauma (30.5%), pressure sores (29.7%), ventilation-associated pneumonia (28.2%), facial edema (16.7%), arrhythmia (15.4%), hypotension (10.2%), and peripheral nerve injuries (8.1%). The reported mitigation strategies during prone positioning included alternate face rotation (18 [43.9%]), repositioning every 2 h (17 [41.5%]), and the use of pillows under the chest and pelvis (14 [34.1%]). The reported mitigation strategies for performing the prone maneuver comprised one person being at the headboard (23 [56.1%]), the use of a pre-maneuver safety checklist (18 [43.9%]), vital sign monitoring (15 [36.6%]), and ensuring appropriate ventilator settings (12 [29.3%]).

CONCLUSIONS

We identified > 40 AEs reported in prone positioning ARDS studies, including additional AEs not yet reported by previous systematic reviews. The pooled AE proportions collected in this review could guide research and clinical practice decisions, and the strategies to mitigate AEs could promote future consensus-based recommendations.

Considerations of invasive mechanical ventilation in prone position. A narrative review

The evidence regarding logistic considerations and safety events associated with prone position ventilation (PPV) is summarized and a flow diagrama for safe provision of mechanical ventilation in the setting of the COVID-19 pandemic is proposed. A review of the literature was conducted in the Medline via Pubmed, Embase, and Lilacs databases, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Randomized Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, ProQuest Nursing and Allied Health Database, and Google scholar. Overall, 31 articles were selected for the analysis. The incidence of PPV-related safety events varies between 1% and 11.9% and the most frequent complications are pressure ulcers and airway complications. Early initiation of enteral nutrition is recommended, and transfers are possible in patients on PPV. There is controversy regarding contraindications and recommendations for PPV. Recommendations for its safe provision are based on expert opinions and the establishment of protocols for healthcare staff training. Clinical studies are required to determine which are the recommendations that should be considered for safe and reproducible PPV use during this pandemic.

Awake Prone Positioning in the Management of COVID-19 Pneumonia: A Systematic Review

Background: The aim was to investigate the efficacy of prone positioning (PP) in the management of coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia in various setups, with various modes of oxygen therapy and its optimal duration. Materials and methods: A systematic literature search was conducted from inception until May 15, 2021. Patients with a validated diagnosis of COVID-19 and receiving PP were included. Various factors, including intensive care unit (ICU) or non-ICU setup, mode of oxygen therapy, outcome, duration of proning, and limitations, were noted. Results: We retrieved 36 articles with a total of 1,385 patients for qualitative analysis. Out of 36 articles, there were 17 original articles, 09 case series, and 10 case reports. Out of 1,385 participants, 78.9% (n = 1,093) and 21.0% (n = 292) of patients were managed in ICU and non-ICU setup, respectively. Awake PP with high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) was found to be a promising technique; however, the result was inconclusive with helmet continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP). No study has evaluated the optimal duration of awake PP and the associated long-term outcomes. Conclusion: We encourage the use of early awake self-proning in the management of COVID19 disease. However, the evidence in terms of its use in non-ICU setup, the optimal duration of PP, and various oxygenation devices are insufficient, thereby mandating further well-designed multicentric studies to evaluate its efficacy as an adjunct in the management of COVID-19 pneumonia in context to the aforementioned factor. How to cite this article: Chilkoti GT, Mohta M, Saxena AK, Ahmad Z, Sharma CS. Awake Prone Positioning in the Management of COVID-19 Pneumonia: A Systematic Review. Indian J Crit Care Med 2021;25(8):896-905.

Cervical Spinal Cord Injury During Prone Position Ventilation in the COVID-19 Pandemic

The prone positioning of patients experiencing acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has been proven effective in optimizing oxygenation and lung function. However, such patients may be at risk of developing complications due to the prolonged prone position in intensive critical care. A 45-year-old COVID-19 female, not known with cervical spine disease, presented with progressive severe COVID-19-related hypoxemia that required intensive care unit admission for pulmonary care. She was positioned prone and ventilated for several weeks. She developed a rapidly advanced decreased level of consciousness and flaccid quadriparesis. CT and MRI scans of the cervical spine revealed C4/C5 fracture-dislocation with spinal cord compression in asymptomatic ankylosing spondylitis and focal ossification of a posterior longitudinal ligament. In addition, the patient had severe ARDS-SARS-CoV-2 hemodynamic instability. Surgery was not performed due to her critical condition, and the patient died from multi-organ failure. Patients with underlying cervical spine disease or deformity can be subjected to hyperextension and develop fatigue (stress) spinal fracture, leading to spinal cord compression. To our knowledge, this is the first case of spontaneous cervical spine fracture dislocation in a COVID-19 patient after several weeks in prone position ventilation in ICU. Hence, our case report raises the awareness of the possibility of devastating spinal cord injuries in prone position ventilation during the COVID-19 pandemic and the need for early screening using plain X-rays of these patients for cervical spine disease.

Comparison of prone positioning and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in acute respiratory distress syndrome: A multicenter cohort study and propensity-matched analysis

Background/Purpose

Both prone positioning and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) are used as rescue therapies for severe hypoxemia in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). This study compared outcomes between patients with severe influenza pneumonia-related ARDS who received prone positioning and those who received ECMO.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study included eight tertiary referral centers in Taiwan. All patients who were diagnosed as having influenza pneumonia-related severe ARDS were enrolled between January and March 2016. We collected their demographic data and prone positioning and ECMO outcomes from medical records.

Results

In total, 263 patients diagnosed as having ARDS were included, and 65 and 53 of them received prone positioning and ECMO, respectively. The baseline PaO₂/FiO₂ ratio, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score did not significantly differ between the two groups. The 60-day mortality rate was significantly higher in the ECMO group than in the prone positioning group (60% vs. 28%, p = 0.001). A significantly higher mortality rate was still observed in the ECMO group after propensity score matching (59% vs. 36%, p = 0.033). In the multivariate Cox regression analysis, usage of prone positioning or ECMO was the single independent predictor for 60-day mortality (hazard ratio: 2.177, p = 0.034).

Conclusion

While the patients receiving prone positioning had better outcome, the causality between prone positioning and the prognosis is unknown. However, the current data suggested that patients with influenza-related ARDS may receive prone positioning before ECMO support.

Clinical benefits of prone positioning in the treatment of non-intubated patients with acute hypoxic respiratory failure: a rapid systematic review

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a surge in critically unwell patients with type 1 respiratory failure. In an attempt to reduce the number of patients requiring mechanical ventilation, prone positioning (PP) of non-intubated patients has been added to many hospital guidelines around the world. We set out to conduct a systematic review of the evidence relating to PP in the non-intubated patient with type 1 respiratory failure secondary to COVID-19 and other causes.

METHODS

The review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement. A literature search of major databases and grey sources was conducted. Studies were assessed for inclusion by two authors according to prespecified criteria. Data collection processes, analysis and risk of bias assessment were planned.

RESULTS

31 studies were included for analysis. These consisted of prospective and retrospective case series, cohort studies and case reports. None of the studies included a comparison group. No statistical analysis was performed. Descriptive data of included studies and narrative synthesis are presented.

CONCLUSIONS

No high-quality randomised controlled trials were found and thus evidence in relation to PP as a treatment for non-intubated patients with type 1 respiratory failure is lacking.

SleepPos App: An Automated Smartphone Application for Angle Based High Resolution Sleep Position Monitoring and Treatment

Poor sleep quality or disturbed sleep is associated with multiple health conditions. Sleep position affects the severity and occurrence of these complications, and positional therapy is one of the less invasive treatments to deal with them. Sleep positions can be self-reported, which is unreliable, or determined by using specific devices, such as polysomnography, polygraphy or cameras, that can be expensive and difficult to employ at home. The aim of this study is to determine how smartphones could be used to monitor and treat sleep position at home. We divided our research into three tasks: (1) develop an Android smartphone application (‘SleepPos’ app) which monitors angle-based high-resolution sleep position and allows to simultaneously apply positional treatment; (2) test the smartphone application at home coupled with a pulse oximeter; and (3) explore the potential of this tool to detect the positional occurrence of desaturation events. The results show how the ‘SleepPos’ app successfully determined the sleep position and revealed positional patterns of occurrence of desaturation events. The ‘SleepPos’ app also succeeded in applying positional therapy and preventing the subjects from sleeping in the supine sleep position. This study demonstrates how smartphones are capable of reliably monitoring high-resolution sleep position and provide useful clinical information about the positional occurrence of desaturation events.

Complications of prone positioning in patients with COVID-19: A cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVE

To determine the prevalence of complications in patients with COVID-19 undergone prone positioning, focusing on the development of prone-related pressure ulcers.

METHODS

Cross-sectional study conducted in the hub COVID-19 centre in Milan (Italy), between March and June 2020. All patients with COVID-19 admitted to intensive care unit on invasive mechanical ventilation and treated with prone positioning were included. Association between prone-related pressure ulcers and selected variables was explored by the means of logistic regression.

RESULTS

A total of 219 proning cycles were performed on 63 patients, aged 57.6 (10.8) and predominantly obese males (66.7%). The main complications recorded were: prone-related pressure ulcers (30.2%), bleeding (25.4%) and medical device displacement (12.7%), even if no unplanned extubation was recorded. The majority of patients (17.5%) experienced bleeding of upper airways. Only 15 prone positioning cycles (6.8%) were interrupted, requiring staff to roll the patient back in the supine position. The likelihood of pressure ulcers development was independently associated with the duration of prone positioning, once adjusting for age, hypoxemic level, and nutritional status (OR 1.9, 95%CI 1.04-3.6).

CONCLUSION

The use of prone positioning in patients with COVID-19 was a safe and feasible treatment, also in obese patients, who might deserve more surveillance and active prevention by intensive care unit staff.

Effects of 45° prone position ventilation in the treatment of acute respiratory distress syndrome: A protocol for a randomized controlled trial study

BACKGROUND

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is an increasingly common acute respiratory failure that seriously threaten people's health. ARDS has a case fatality rate of up to 40%. ARDS is a serious threat to the life safety of patients and the quality of life, causing a huge economic burden to individuals, families and society. ARDS has become a large worldwide public health problem. Prone position ventilation (PPV) is an important auxiliary treatment for ARDS, which could improve oxygenation. However, PPV could cause Pressure injuries (PI) and other complications easily. We found that 45° PPV could reduce the incidence of PI, but lack of robust Evidence-based medicine evidence proving its efficacy. Therefore, we designed a randomized controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy of 45° PPV in the treatment of ARDS.

METHODS

A total of 268 patients will be randomly assigned to the control group and the test group (n = 134 each) in a ratio of 1:1. The treatment period is 7 days. The primary outcome measure will be the incidence of PI. The secondary outcomes will include APACHE II score, Braden Scale score, heart rate, systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, central venous pressure, mean arterial pressure, pH of arterial blood, oxygenation index, oxygen partial pressure, and carbon dioxide partial pressure. The evaluation will be performed at baseline, 1 hour, 12 hour, 48 hour, 5days, 7days after PPPV.

RESULTS

This study is helpful to evaluate the efficacy of 45° PPV in the treatment of ARDS.

CONCLUSION

45° PPV may reduce the incidence of PI and improve oxygenation in patients with ARDS, which has important value in practical application.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ChiCTR2000040436, registration time: November 28, 2020.

The efficacy and tolerance of prone positioning in non-intubation patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure and ARDS: a meta-analysis

Background and aims:

The application of prone positioning with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF) or acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) in non-intubation patients is increasing gradually, applying prone positioning for more high-flow nasal oxygen therapy (HFNC) and non-invasive ventilation (NIV) patients. This meta-analysis evaluates the efficacy and tolerance of prone positioning combined with non-invasive respiratory support in patients with AHRF or ARDS.

Methods:

We searched randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (prospective or retrospective cohort studies, RCTs and case series) published in PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from 1 January 2000 to 1 July 2020. We included studies that compared prone and supine positioning with non-invasive respiratory support in awake patients with AHRF or ARDS. The meta-analyses used random effects models. The methodological quality of the RCTs was evaluated using the Newcastle–Ottawa quality assessment scale.

Results:

A total of 16 studies fulfilled selection criteria and included 243 patients. The aggregated intubation rate and mortality rate were 33% [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.26–0.42, I² = 25%], 4% (95% CI: 0.01–0.07, I² = 0%), respectively, and the intolerance rate was 7% (95% CI: 0.01–0.12, I² = 5%). Prone positioning increased PaO₂/FiO₂ [mean difference (MD) = 47.89, 95% CI: 28.12–67.66; p < 0.00001, I² = 67%] and SpO₂ (MD = 4.58, 95% CI: 1.35–7.80, p = 0.005, I² = 97%), whereas it reduced respiratory rate (MD = −5.01, 95% CI: −8.49 to −1.52, p = 0.005, I² = 85%). Subgroup analyses demonstrated that the intubation rate of shorter duration prone (⩽5 h/day) and longer duration prone (>5 h/day) were 34% and 21%, respectively; and the mortality rate of shorter duration prone (⩽5 h/day) and longer duration prone (>5 h/day) were 6% and 0%, respectively. PaO₂/FiO₂ and SpO₂ were significantly improved in COVID-19 patients and non-COVID-19 patients.

Conclusion:

Prone positioning could improve the oxygenation and reduce respiratory rate in both COVID-19 patients and non-COVID-19 patients with non-intubated AHRF or ARDS.

The reviews of this paper are available via the supplemental material section.

Awake Proning as an Adjunctive Therapy for Refractory Hypoxemia in Non-Intubated Patients with COVID-19 Acute Respiratory Failure: Guidance from an International Group of Healthcare Workers

Non-intubated patients with acute respiratory failure due to COVID-19 could benefit from awake proning. Awake proning is an attractive intervention in settings with limited resources, as it comes with no additional costs. However, awake proning remains poorly used probably because of unfamiliarity and uncertainties regarding potential benefits and practical application. To summarize evidence for benefit and to develop a set of pragmatic recommendations for awake proning in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia, focusing on settings where resources are limited, international healthcare professionals from high and low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) with known expertise in awake proning were invited to contribute expert advice. A growing number of observational studies describe the effects of awake proning in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia in whom hypoxemia is refractory to simple measures of supplementary oxygen. Awake proning improves oxygenation in most patients, usually within minutes, and reduces dyspnea and work of breathing. The effects are maintained for up to 1 hour after turning back to supine, and mostly disappear after 6-12 hours. In available studies, awake proning was not associated with a reduction in the rate of intubation for invasive ventilation. Awake proning comes with little complications if properly implemented and monitored. Pragmatic recommendations including indications and contraindications were formulated and adjusted for resource-limited settings. Awake proning, an adjunctive treatment for hypoxemia refractory to supplemental oxygen, seems safe in non-intubated patients with COVID-19 acute respiratory failure. We provide pragmatic recommendations including indications and contraindications for the use of awake proning in LMICs.

Nursing Management of Prone Positioning in Patients With COVID-19

BACKGROUND

At the height of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, Italy had the highest number of deaths in Europe; most occurred in the Lombardy region. Up to 4% of patients with COVID-19 required admission to an intensive care unit because they developed a critical illness (eg, acute respiratory distress syndrome). Numerous patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome who had been admitted to the intensive care unit required rescue therapy like prone positioning.

OBJECTIVE

To describe the respiratory management of and the extensive use of prone positioning in patients with COVID-19 at the intensive care unit hub in Lombardy, Italy.

METHODS

A total of 89 patients (67% male; median age, 59 years [range, 23-80 years]) with confirmed COVID-19 who were admitted between February 23 and March 31, 2020, were enrolled in this quality improvement project.

RESULTS

Endotracheal intubation was required in 86 patients (97%). Prone positioning was used as rescue therapy in 43 (48%) patients. Significantly more younger patients (age ≤ 59 years) were discharged alive (43 of 48 [90%]) than were older patients (age ≥ 60 years; 26 of 41 [63%]; P < .005). Among the 43 patients treated with prone ventilation, 15 (35% [95% CI, 21%-51%]) died in the intensive care unit, of which 10 (67%; P < .001) were older patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Prone positioning is one strategy available for treating acute respiratory distress syndrome in patients with COVID-19. During this pandemic, prone positioning can be used extensively as rescue therapy, per a specific protocol, in intensive care units.

Nursing care and prevalence of adverse events in prone position: Characteristics of mechanically ventilated patients with severe SARS-CoV-2 pulmonary infection

Background

Because of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic, the use of prone positioning has dramatically increased in the intensive care unit (ICU). Because this manoeuvre is related to several complications, it must be performed in a protocolized manner by the appropriate personnel.

Aim

To determine the prevalence of adverse events (AEs) in patients admitted to the ICU with a diagnosis of COVID‐19‐related acute respiratory distress syndrome (C‐ARDS) undergoing mechanical ventilation in prone position (PP).

Design

Descriptive ambispective study of patients admitted to the ICU diagnosed with C‐ARDS undergoing mechanical ventilation who were in the PP at least once.

The number of PP manoeuvres and the time spent in the PP were recorded for each subject. AEs proportions and frequencies were calculated, and analysis of variance was used to assess mean differences in the number of manoeuvres and total hours in PP stratified by the number of facial pressure ulcers. IBM SPSS Statistics v.25.0. and EPIDAT 4.1 software were used.

Results

Forty‐four patients were analysed, and 130 PP manoeuvres were performed. The most frequently observed AEs were facial oedema in 26 patients (80.3%) and facial pressure ulcers in 20 (60.6%). There was a significant positive association between the time spent in PP and the development of facial pressure ulcers (P < .001). Enteral nutrition was well tolerated, and no serious AEs or sentinel events were noted.

Conclusion

Despite the stressful, demanding situation during the peak of the pandemic, the large number of PP manoeuvres, and long duration spent in this position, no serious AEs occurred. This study highlights the need to implement preventive measures to avoid the development of pressure ulcers secondary to prone positioning.

Relevance to practice

Prone positioning requires a nursing protocol to prevent the occurrence of AEs that may reduce the quality of nursing care.

The Fundamentals of Respiratory Physiology to Manage the COVID-19 Pandemic: An Overview

The growing coronavirus disease (COVID-19) crisis has stressed worldwide healthcare systems probably as never before, requiring a tremendous increase of the capacity of intensive care units to handle the sharp rise of patients in critical situation. Since the dominant respiratory feature of COVID-19 is worsening arterial hypoxemia, eventually leading to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) promptly needing mechanical ventilation, a systematic recourse to intubation of every hypoxemic patient may be difficult to sustain in such peculiar context and may not be deemed appropriate for all patients. Then, it is essential that caregivers have a solid knowledge of physiological principles to properly interpret arterial oxygenation, to intubate at the satisfactory moment, to adequately manage mechanical ventilation, and, finally, to initiate ventilator weaning, as safely and as expeditiously as possible, in order to make it available for the next patient. Through the expected mechanisms of COVID-19-induced hypoxemia, as well as the notion of silent hypoxemia often evoked in COVID-19 lung injury and its potential parallelism with high altitude pulmonary edema, from the description of hemoglobin oxygen affinity in patients with severe COVID-19 to the interest of the prone positioning in order to treat severe ARDS patients, this review aims to help caregivers from any specialty to handle respiratory support following recent knowledge in the pathophysiology of respiratory SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Pressure Injury Prevention in COVID-19 Patients With Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), which is caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), was identified in China in December 2019 and became a pandemic in a short period of time. While most infected people might have mild symptoms, older people and people with chronic illnesses may develop acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Patients with ARDS with worsening hypoxemia require prone positioning to improve the respiratory mechanics and oxygenation. Intubated patients may stay in a prone position up to 12–16 h, increasing the risk of pressure injury (PI). Frequent skin inspections and PI risk assessment in COVID-19 patients will be challenging due to hospital infection control measures aimed to reduce the risk for health professionals. In this perspective article, we summarize the best practice recommendations for prevention of PI in SARS-CoV-2-infected ARDS patients in prone positioning. Prior to positioning patients in prone position, the main recommendations are to (1) conduct a skin assessment, (2) use pressure redistribution devices, (3) select an appropriate mattress or an overlay, (4) ensure that the endotracheal tube securing device is removed and the endotracheal tube is secured with tapes, (5) use a liquid film-forming protective dressing, and (6) lubricate the eyes and tape them closed. Once a patient is in prone position, it is recommended to (1) use the swimmer's position, (2) reposition the patient every 2 h, and (3) keep the skin clean. When the patient is repositioned to supine position, healthcare professionals are advised to (1) assess the pressure points and (2) promote early mobilization.

Ischemia-reperfusion Injury in the Transplanted Lung: A Literature Review

Lung ischemia-reperfusion injury (LIRI) and primary graft dysfunction are leading causes of morbidity and mortality among lung transplant recipients. Although extensive research endeavors have been undertaken, few preventative and therapeutic treatments have emerged for clinical use. Novel strategies are still needed to improve outcomes after lung transplantation. In this review, we discuss the underlying mechanisms of transplanted LIRI, potential modifiable targets, current practices, and areas of ongoing investigation to reduce LIRI and primary graft dysfunction in lung transplant recipients.

Effects of Prone Ventilation on Oxygenation, Inflammation, and Lung Infiltrates in COVID-19 Related Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Patients receiving mechanical ventilation for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) related, moderate-to-severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (CARDS) have mortality rates between 76-98%. The objective of this retrospective cohort study was to identify differences in prone ventilation effects on oxygenation, pulmonary infiltrates (as observed on chest X-ray (CXR)), and systemic inflammation in CARDS patients by survivorship and to identify baseline characteristics associated with survival after prone ventilation. The study cohort included 23 patients with moderate-to-severe CARDS who received prone ventilation for ≥16 h/day and was segmented by living status: living (n = 6) and deceased (n = 17). Immediately after prone ventilation, PaO2/FiO2 improved by 108% (p < 0.03) for the living and 150% (p < 3 × 10-4) for the deceased. However, the 48 h change in lung infiltrate severity in gravity-dependent lung zones was significantly better for the living than for the deceased (p < 0.02). In CXRs of the lower lungs before prone ventilation, we observed 5 patients with confluent infiltrates bilaterally, 12 patients with ground-glass opacities (GGOs) bilaterally, and 6 patients with mixed infiltrate patterns; 80% of patients with confluent infiltrates were alive vs. 8% of patients with GGOs. In conclusion, our small study indicates that CXRs may offer clinical utility in selecting patients with moderate-to-severe CARDS who will benefit from prone ventilation. Additionally, our study suggests that lung infiltrate severity may be a better indicator of patient disposition after prone ventilation than PaO2/FiO2.

Clinical care of pregnant and postpartum women with COVID-19: Living recommendations from the National COVID-19 Clinical Evidence Taskforce

To date, 18 living recommendations for the clinical care of pregnant and postpartum women with COVID-19 have been issued by the National COVID-19 Clinical Evidence Taskforce. This includes recommendations on mode of birth, delayed umbilical cord clamping, skin-to-skin contact, breastfeeding, rooming-in, antenatal corticosteroids, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, disease-modifying treatments (including dexamethasone, remdesivir and hydroxychloroquine), venous thromboembolism prophylaxis and advanced respiratory support interventions (prone positioning and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation). Through continuous evidence surveillance, these living recommendations are updated in near real-time to ensure clinicians in Australia have reliable, evidence-based guidelines for clinical decision-making. Please visit https://covid19evidence.net.au/ for the latest recommendation updates.

Ventilator-associated lung injury in the intensive care unit and operating room – what's new?

The prophylaxis of ventilator-associated lung injury (VALI) and postoperative pulmonary complications (PPC) is of utmost importance to reduce complications both in the perioperative period of major surgery and in the intensive care unit (ICU).

Protective approach to mechanical ventilation comprises a wide range of measures reducing the damage of the lung tissue associated with the stress and strain phenomena. The implementation of the strategy of high positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) in combination with alveolar recruitment maneuver has numerous limitations and requires further personalized approaches.

When lung injury is self-induced by a patient, it becomes an important contributor to VALI and should be timely diagnosed and prevented both before initiation of mechanical support and during the restoration of spontaneous breathing. This review highlights the key mechanisms of VALI and current understanding of protective ventilation. The concept of damaging energy as well as approaches to the personalized optimization of respiratory settings are discussed in detail. Particular attention is paid to the prognostication of the risk factors of VALI and PPC.

Critically Ill Patients with COVID-19: A Narrative Review on Prone Position

INTRODUCTION

Prone position is known to improve mortality in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). The impact of prone position in critically ill patients with coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) remains to be determined. In this review, we describe the mechanisms of action of prone position, systematically appraise the current experience of prone position in COVID-19 patients, and highlight unique considerations for prone position practices during this pandemic.

METHODS

For our systematic review, we searched PubMed, Scopus and EMBASE from January 1, 2020, to April 16, 2020. After completion of our search, we became aware of four relevant publications during article preparation that were published in May and June 2020, and these studies were reviewed for eligibility and inclusion. We included all studies reporting clinical characteristics of patients admitted to the hospital with COVID-19 disease who received respiratory support with high-flow nasal cannula, or noninvasive or mechanical ventilation and reported the use of prone position. The full text of eligible articles was reviewed, and data regarding study design, patient characteristics, interventions and outcomes were extracted.

RESULTS

We found seven studies (total 1899 patients) describing prone position in COVID-19. Prone position has been increasingly used in non-intubated patients with COVID-19; studies show high tolerance and improvement in oxygenation and lung recruitment. Published studies lacked a description of important clinical outcomes (e.g., mortality, duration of mechanical ventilation).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the findings of our review, we recommend prone position in patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 ARDS as per existing guidelines. A trial of prone position should be considered for non-intubated COVID-19 patients with hypoxemic respiratory failure, as long as this does not result in a delay in intubation.

Factors Influencing Prone Positioning in Treating Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome and the Effect on Mortality Rate

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is often associated with severe hypoxemia and a high mortality rate. Prone positioning is a well-established intervention for ARDS. It has been shown to improve oxygenation and prevent ventilator-induced lung injury due to the more uniform distribution of lung stress and strain. This narrative review aims to compare the various factors that may influence how prone positioning affects mortality rates. We will examine the duration of time a patient is in the prone position, severity of ARDS, use of lung-protective ventilation, and the time elapsed between ARDS diagnosis and placing a patient in the prone position. A literature review on prone positioning in ARDS was performed and searched data from PubMed and Google Scholar for articles published from 2010 to 2020. Although no single variable used during prone positioning reduces mortality rates in ARDS patients, combining several optimal conditions may yield increased survival benefits. Early initiation of extended prone positioning sessions combined with low tidal volumes shows encouraging results in severe ARDS patients. Future research on this subject should focus on further examining these variables in a study enrolling a larger number of subjects in a setting with adequately trained staff familiar with proper prone positioning techniques.

Successful awake proning is associated with improved clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19: single-centre high-dependency unit experience

The SARS-CoV-2 can lead to severe illness with COVID-19. Outcomes of patients requiring mechanical ventilation are poor. Awake proning in COVID-19 improves oxygenation, but on data clinical outcomes is limited. This single-centre retrospective study aimed to assess whether successful awake proning of patients with COVID-19, requiring respiratory support (continuous positive airways pressure (CPAP) or high-flow nasal oxygen (HFNO)) on a respiratory high-dependency unit (HDU), is associated with improved outcomes. HDU care included awake proning by respiratory physiotherapists. Of 565 patients admitted with COVID-19, 71 (12.6%) were managed on the respiratory HDU, with 48 of these (67.6%) requiring respiratory support. Patients managed with CPAP alone 22/48 (45.8%) were significantly less likely to die than patients who required transfer onto HFNO 26/48 (54.2%): CPAP mortality 36.4%; HFNO mortality 69.2%, (p=0.023); however, multivariate analysis demonstrated that increasing age and the inability to awake prone were the only independent predictors of COVID-19 mortality. The mortality of patients with COVID-19 requiring respiratory support is considerable. Data from our cohort managed on HDU show that CPAP and awake proning are possible in a selected population of COVID-19, and may be useful. Further prospective studies are required.

Conscious prone positioning during non-invasive ventilation in COVID-19 patients: experience from a single centre

Critically ill patients admitted to hospital following SARS-CoV-2 infection often experience hypoxic respiratory failure and a proportion require invasive mechanical ventilation to maintain adequate oxygenation. The combination of prone positioning and non-invasive ventilation in conscious patients may have a role in improving oxygenation. The purpose of this study was to assess the effect of prone positioning in spontaneously ventilating patients receiving non-invasive ventilation admitted to the intensive care.  Clinical data of 81 patients admitted with COVID 19 pneumonia and acute hypoxic respiratory failure were retrieved from electronic medical records and examined. Patients who had received prone positioning in combination with non-invasive ventilation were identified.

A total of 20 patients received prone positioning in conjunction with non-invasive ventilation. This resulted in improved oxygenation as measured by a change in PaO ₂/FiO ₂ (P/F) ratio of 28.7 mmHg while prone, without significant change in heart rate or respiratory rate. Patients on average underwent 5 cycles with a median duration of 3 hours. There were no reported deaths, 7 of the 20 patients (35%) failed non-invasive ventilation and subsequently required intubation and mechanical ventilation. In our cohort of 20 COVID-19 patients with moderate acute hypoxic respiratory failure, prone positioning with non-invasive ventilation resulted in improved oxygenation. Prone positioning with non-invasive ventilation may be considered as an early therapeutic intervention in COVID-19 patients with moderate acute hypoxic respiratory failure.

Novel technique using surgical scrub sponges to protect the nose and face during prone ventilation for coronavirus disease 2019

Background

Coronavirus disease 2019 is an international pandemic. One of the cardinal features is acute respiratory distress syndrome, and proning has been identified as beneficial for a subset of patients. However, proning is associated with pressure-related side effects, including injury to the nose and face.

Method

This paper describes a pressure-relieving technique using surgical scrub sponges. This technique was derived based on previous methods used in patients following rhinectomy.

Conclusion

The increased use of prone ventilation has resulted in a number of referrals to the ENT team with concerns regarding nasal pressure damage. The described technique, which is straightforward and uses readily available materials, has proven effective in relieving pressure in a small number of patients.

A primer on proning in the emergency department

Historically, the prone position was used almost exclusively in the ICU for patients suffering from refractory hypoxemia due to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Amidst the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) pandemic, however, this technique has been increasingly utilized in settings outside of the ICU, particularly in the emergency department. With emerging evidence that patients diagnosed with COVID‐19 who are not intubated and mechanically ventilated may benefit from the prone position, this strategy should not be isolated to only those with critical illness. This is a review of the pertinent physiology and evidence supporting prone positioning along with a step‐by‐step guide meant to familiarize those who are not already comfortable with the maneuver. Placing a patient in the prone position helps to improve ventilation‐perfusion matching, dorsal lung recruitment, and ultimately gas exchange. Evidence also suggests there is improved oxygenation in both mechanically ventilated patients and those who are awake and spontaneously breathing, further reinforcing the utility of the prone position in non‐ICU settings. Given present concerns about resource limitations because of the pandemic, prone positioning has especially demonstrable value as a technique to delay or even prevent intubation. Patients who are able to self‐prone should be directed into the ''swimmer's position'' and then placed in reverse Trendelenburg position if further oxygenation is needed. If a mechanically ventilated patient is to be placed in the prone position, specific precautions should be taken to ensure the patient's safety and to prevent any unwanted sequelae of prone positioning.

Prone positioning in conscious patients on medical wards: A review of the evidence and its relevance to patients with COVID-19 infection

Medical teams continue to treat many patients with COVID-19 infection. This disease can result in profound hypoxaemia that may necessitate intubation and invasive mechanical ventilation in those who are critically ill. This intervention carries risk to both patients and healthcare workers and utilises significant hospital resource for prolonged periods. Simple, safe interventions that can be used before critical deterioration are highly desirable. The prone position in conscious non-ventilated patients with COVID-19 infection may improve oxygenation in the short term and defer or prevent the need for intubation in some. However, clinicians must be aware that there is a small evidence base for this intervention currently. This review sets out evidence regarding the use of this technique to aid the decision making of frontline staff.

Intubation and Ventilation amid the COVID-19 Outbreak: Wuhan's Experience

The COVID-19 outbreak has led to 80,409 diagnosed cases and 3,012 deaths in mainland China based on the data released on March 4, 2020. Approximately 3.2% of patients with COVID-19 required intubation and invasive ventilation at some point in the disease course. Providing best practices regarding intubation and ventilation for an overwhelming number of patients with COVID-19 amid an enhanced risk of cross-infection is a daunting undertaking. The authors presented the experience of caring for the critically ill patients with COVID-19 in Wuhan. It is extremely important to follow strict self-protection precautions. Timely, but not premature, intubation is crucial to counter a progressively enlarging oxygen debt despite high-flow oxygen therapy and bilevel positive airway pressure ventilation. Thorough preparation, satisfactory preoxygenation, modified rapid sequence induction, and rapid intubation using a video laryngoscope are widely used intubation strategies in Wuhan. Lung-protective ventilation, prone position ventilation, and adequate sedation and analgesia are essential components of ventilation management.

Protective ventilation from ICU to operating room: state of art and new horizons

The prevention of ventilator-associated lung injury (VALI) and postoperative pulmonary complications (PPC) is of paramount importance for improving outcomes both in the operating room and in the intensive care unit (ICU). Protective respiratory support includes a wide spectrum of interventions to decrease pulmonary stress-strain injuries. The motto 'low tidal volume for all' should become routine, both during major surgery and in the ICU, while application of a high positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) strategy and of alveolar recruitment maneuvers requires a personalized approach and requires further investigation. Patient self-inflicted lung injury is an important type of VALI, which should be diagnosed and mitigated at the early stage, during restoration of spontaneous breathing. This narrative review highlights the strategies used for protective positive pressure ventilation. The emerging concepts of damaging energy and power, as well as pathways to personalization of the respiratory settings, are discussed in detail. In the future, individualized approaches to protective ventilation may involve multiple respiratory settings extending beyond low tidal volume and PEEP, implemented in parallel with quantifying the risk of VALI and PPC.

Intubation and Ventilation amid the COVID-19 Outbreak: Wuhan's Experience

The COVID-19 outbreak has led to 80,409 diagnosed cases and 3,012 deaths in mainland China based on the data released on March 4, 2020. Approximately 3.2% of patients with COVID-19 required intubation and invasive ventilation at some point in the disease course. Providing best practices regarding intubation and ventilation for an overwhelming number of patients with COVID-19 amid an enhanced risk of cross-infection is a daunting undertaking. The authors presented the experience of caring for the critically ill patients with COVID-19 in Wuhan. It is extremely important to follow strict self-protection precautions. Timely, but not premature, intubation is crucial to counter a progressively enlarging oxygen debt despite high-flow oxygen therapy and bilevel positive airway pressure ventilation. Thorough preparation, satisfactory preoxygenation, modified rapid sequence induction, and rapid intubation using a video laryngoscope are widely used intubation strategies in Wuhan. Lung-protective ventilation, prone position ventilation, and adequate sedation and analgesia are essential components of ventilation management.

Surviving Sepsis Campaign: Guidelines on the Management of Critically Ill Adults with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)

BACKGROUND

The novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the cause of a rapidly spreading illness, Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), affecting thousands of people around the world. Urgent guidance for clinicians caring for the sickest of these patients is needed.

METHODS

We formed a panel of 36 experts from 12 countries. All panel members completed the World Health Organization conflict of interest disclosure form. The panel proposed 53 questions that are relevant to the management of COVID-19 in the ICU. We searched the literature for direct and indirect evidence on the management of COVID-19 in critically ill patients in the ICU. We identified relevant and recent systematic reviews on most questions relating to supportive care. We assessed the certainty in the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, then generated recommendations based on the balance between benefit and harm, resource and cost implications, equity, and feasibility. Recommendations were either strong or weak, or in the form of best practice recommendations.

RESULTS

The Surviving Sepsis Campaign COVID-19 panel issued 54 statements, of which four are best practice statements, nine are strong recommendations, and 35 are weak recommendations. No recommendation was provided for six questions. The topics were: 1) infection control, 2) laboratory diagnosis and specimens, 3) hemodynamic support, 4) ventilatory support, and 5) COVID-19 therapy.

CONCLUSION

The Surviving Sepsis Campaign COVID-19 panel issued several recommendations to help support healthcare workers caring for critically ill ICU patients with COVID-19. When available, we will provide new evidence in further releases of these guidelines.

Surviving Sepsis Campaign: guidelines on the management of critically ill adults with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)

Background

The novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the cause of a rapidly spreading illness, Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), affecting thousands of people around the world. Urgent guidance for clinicians caring for the sickest of these patients is needed.

Methods

We formed a panel of 36 experts from 12 countries. All panel members completed the World Health Organization conflict of interest disclosure form. The panel proposed 53 questions that are relevant to the management of COVID-19 in the ICU. We searched the literature for direct and indirect evidence on the management of COVID-19 in critically ill patients in the ICU. We identified relevant and recent systematic reviews on most questions relating to supportive care. We assessed the certainty in the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, then generated recommendations based on the balance between benefit and harm, resource and cost implications, equity, and feasibility. Recommendations were either strong or weak, or in the form of best practice recommendations.

Results

The Surviving Sepsis Campaign COVID-19 panel issued 54 statements, of which 4 are best practice statements, 9 are strong recommendations, and 35 are weak recommendations. No recommendation was provided for 6 questions. The topics were: (1) infection control, (2) laboratory diagnosis and specimens, (3) hemodynamic support, (4) ventilatory support, and (5) COVID-19 therapy.

Conclusion

The Surviving Sepsis Campaign COVID-19 panel issued several recommendations to help support healthcare workers caring for critically ill ICU patients with COVID-19. When available, we will provide new recommendations in further releases of these guidelines.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s00134-020-06022-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Administration of enteral nutrition in the prone position, gastric residual volume and other clinical outcomes in critically ill patients: a systematic review

This systematic review of longitudinal studies aimed to evaluate the effect of enteral feeding of critically ill adult and pediatric patients in the prone position on gastric residual volume and other clinical outcomes. A literature search was conducted in the databases PubMed, Scopus and Embase using terms related to population and intervention. Two independent reviewers analyzed the titles and abstracts, and data collection was performed using a standardized form. Discrepancies were resolved by a third reviewer. The methodological quality of the studies was evaluated considering the potential for systematic errors, and the data were qualitatively analyzed. Four studies with adult patients and one with preterm patients were included. The gastric residual volume was evaluated as the main outcome: three studies did not show differences in the gastric residual volume between the prone and supine positions (p > 0.05), while one study showed a higher gastric residual volume during enteral feeding in the prone position (27.6mL versus 10.6mL; p < 0.05), and another group observed a greater gastric residual volume in the supine position (reduction of the gastric residual volume by 23.3% in the supine position versus 43.9% in the prone position; p < 0.01). Two studies evaluated the frequency of vomiting; one study found that it was higher in the prone position (30 versus 26 episodes; p < 0.001), while the other study found no significant difference (p > 0.05). The incidence of aspiration pneumonia and death were evaluated in one study, with no difference between groups (p > 0.05). The literature on the administration of enteral feeding in the prone position in critically ill patients is sparse and of limited quality, and the results regarding gastric residual volume are contradictory. Observational studies with appropriate sample sizes should be conducted to support conclusions on the subject.