Prone Position of Patients With COVID-19 and Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome

Understanding the Evolving Pathophysiology of Coronavirus Disease 2019 and Adult Nursing Management

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was first identified in December 2019 and quickly became a global pandemic. The understanding of the pathophysiology, treatment, and management of the disease has evolved since the beginning of the pandemic in 2020. COVID-19 can be complicated by immune system dysfunction, lung injury with hypoxemia, acute kidney injury, and coagulopathy. The treatment and management of COVID-19 is based on the severity of illness, ranging from asymptomatic to severe and often life-threatening disease. The 3 main recommended medication classes include antivirals, immunomodulators, and anticoagulants. Other supportive therapies include ensuring adequate oxygenation, mechanical ventilation, and prone positioning.

Effects of awake-prone positioning on oxygenation and physiological outcomes in non-intubated patients with COVID-19: A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Prone positioning is a well-known supportive approach for increasing oxygenation and reducing mortality in non-COVID-19 patients with moderate to severe acute respiratory distress syndrome. However, studies highlighting the effects of proning in patients with COVID-19 are limited.

AIM

To investigate the effects of awake-prone positioning (APP) on oxygenation and physiological outcomes in non-intubated patients with COVID-19.

STUDY DESIGN

A randomized controlled trial was carried out with two parallel groups at 1:1 ratio. Adult awake non-intubated patients with confirmed COVID-19, non-rebreathing face mask or continuous positive airway pressure, PaO2 /FiO2 ratio ≤150 mmHg were randomly assigned to the APP group or control group. The control group was subjected to conventional positioning interventions. Outcome measures were PaO2 /FiO2 ratio, ROX index, PaO2 , PaCO2 , SaO2 , respiratory rate, blood pressure, and shock index. These parameters were recorded immediately before positioning, 10 min after patient positioning, and 1 h after patient positioning.

RESULTS

Of 115 patients assessed for eligibility, 82 were randomized to the APP group or control group (41 patients in each group). The use of APP for non-intubated patients with COVID-19 resulted in statistically significant improvements in oxygenation parameters, that is, SpO2 , PaO2 /FiO2 , ROX index, PaO2 , and SaO2 , at the three study time points (p = .000, .007, .000, .011, and .000 respectively). The SpO2 was increased to 92.15 ± 2.735 mmHg for the APP group versus 88.17 ± 4.847 for the control group after 1 h of patients' positioning. The PaO2 /FiO2 ratio increased in the APP group before proning compared with 1 h after proning (79.95 ± 22.508 vs. 98.91 ± 34.44) respectively. APP improved the SpO2 , PaO2 /FiO2 , ROX index, PaO2 , and SaO2 values for the APP group, representing an increase of 5.85%, 23.71%, 30.79%, 22.59%, and 5.26%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Awake proning in non-intubated patients with COVID-19 showed marked improvement in oxygenation and physiological parameters.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

This study provides evidence for critical care nurses to implement APP in non-intubated patients with COVID-19 to improve oxygenation and physiological parameters, as it was tolerated by most of the patients without serious adverse events.

Eye Care Interventions in Critical/Surgical Patients in the Prone Position: Scoping Review

Objectives: This study aimed to map evidence of eye care interventions in managing critical or surgical patients submitted to prone positions. Materials and method: This scoping review was prepared according to the Joanna Briggs Institute’s methodology, following the PRISMA-ScR criteria. A search was conducted from July to August 2020 in the SCOPUS, Web of Science, Science Direct, PubMed Central, CINAHL, and COCHRANE databases. The following research question was delimited: “What are the strategies and interventions used for eye care in the management of critical patients or surgical patients submitted to the prone position?” The sample consisted of 24 studies after applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Results: Eye care interventions in managing critical/surgical patients submitted to the prone position were eye examination, use of lubricants/specific ophthalmic solution, reverse Trendelenburg positioning, and protection with adhesive tape. Conclusions: This review allowed the understanding of eye care for critical/surgical patients in a prone position. Among the care presented, a large part is related to nursing since it is closer to patient care. The findings emphasize the need to implement patient safety policies with eye care as a priority.

Non-pharmacological treatments for COVID-19: current status and consensus

Purpose

COVID-19 is a disease caused by SARS-CoV-2 (coronavirus type 2 of the severe acute respiratory syndrome), isolated in China, in December 2019. The strategy currently used by physicians is to control disease and to treat symptoms, including non-pharmacological treatments, as there is still no specific treatment for COVID-19. Thus, the aim of this article is to carry out a systematic review about non-pharmacological treatments used for COVID-19, addressing current status and consensus found in the literature.

Methods

Three databases were consulted for evidence referring to the drugs indicated for COVID-19 (Cochrane Central, MEDLINE and Embase). The following terms and combinations were used: ((“2019-nCoV” OR 2019nCoV OR nCoV2019 OR “nCoV-2019” OR “COVID-19” OR COVID19 OR “HCoV-19” OR HCoV19 OR CoV OR “2019 novel*” OR Ncov OR “n-cov” OR “SARS-CoV-2” OR “SARSCoV-2” OR “SARSCoV2” OR “SARSCoV2” OR SARSCov19 OR “SARS-Cov19” OR “SARS-Cov-19”) OR “severe acute respiratory syndrome*” OR ((corona* OR corono*) AND (virus* OR viral* OR virinae*)) AND ((“lung injury”) OR (“ventilation use”) OR (“respiratory injuries” OR prone)) AND (treatment)) NOT Drugs NOT medicines NOT antivirals.

Results

A total of 28 articles were selected. These articles adopted one or more treatment methods for patients with severe cases of COVID-19, i.e., oxygen therapy, prone position, inhaled nitric oxide, intravenous infusion, passive immunotherapy, mesenchymal stem cells (MSC).

Conclusion

There is still no specific treatment approved for patients with COVID-19. The available evidence is not able yet to indicate the benefits or harms of non-pharmacological treatments, but some studies show that some treatments can play an important role in relation to COVID-19. The current consensus among researchers is that several studies using a randomized clinical trial should be carried out to provide evidence of safety and efficacy of the proposed treatments.

Efficacy of Colchicine and Budesonide in Improvement Outcomes of Patients with Coronavirus Infection 2019 in Damascus, Syria: A Randomized Control Trial

COVID-19 was reported in China in 2019 and has spread worldwide. Transmission occurs through respiratory secretions and, less commonly, through contaminated surfaces. The severity of the disease can range from asymptomatic to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). In this study, we aim to investigate the efficacy of two agents (oral colchicine and budesonide inhaler) in COVID-19 infection management, compared with supportive care alone. 77 patients were admitted to the isolation section of Al Assad University Hospital, between the 1st of August and the 30th of August. A total of 49 patients were included in this randomized control trial, after excluding ineligible patients. The random sample was divided into three groups; the first group was supportive care plus colchicine, the second group was supportive care plus budesonide inhaler, and the control group was supportive care alone. PaO2/FiO2 was improved in the budesonide group, higher than the supportive and colchicine groups. The median hospitalization days were shorter when using colchicine or budesonide, opposed to supportive care alone (8 vs 10 days, respectively). 34 patients (69.3%) were discharged, and 27 patients (55.1%) were followed up until they were weaned from oxygen and made a complete recovery. There was a significant decrease in mortality with colchicine (3 patients; 21.4%) compared with supportive care (7 patients; 33.3%) and the budesonide group (5 patients; 35.7%).

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.

Effect of prone position on respiratory parameters, intubation and death rate in COVID-19 patients: systematic review and meta-analysis

Prone position (PP) is known to improve oxygenation and reduce mortality in COVID-19 patients. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine the effects of PP on respiratory parameters and outcomes. PubMed, EMBASE, ProQuest, SCOPUS, Web of Sciences, Cochrane library, and Google Scholar were searched up to 1st January 2021. Twenty-eight studies were included. The Cochran's Q-test and I2 statistic were assessed heterogeneity, the random-effects model was estimated the pooled mean difference (PMD), and a meta-regression method has utilized the factors affecting heterogeneity between studies. PMD with 95% confidence interval (CI) of PaO2/FIO2 Ratio in before-after design, quasi-experimental design and in overall was 55.74, 56.38, and 56.20 mmHg. These values for Spo2 (Sao2) were 3.38, 17.03, and 7.58. PP in COVID-19 patients lead to significantly decrease of the Paco2 (PMD: - 8.69; 95% CI - 14.69 to - 2.69 mmHg) but significantly increase the PaO2 (PMD: 37.74; 95% CI 7.16-68.33 mmHg). PP has no significant effect on the respiratory rate. Based on meta-regression, the study design has a significant effect on the heterogeneity of Spo2 (Sao2) (Coefficient: 12.80; p < 0.001). No significant associations were observed for other respiratory parameters with sample size and study design. The pooled estimate for death rate and intubation rates were 19.03 (8.19-32.61) and 30.68 (21.39-40.75). The prone positioning was associated with improved oxygenation parameters and reduced mortality and intubation rate in COVID-19 related respiratory failure.

Polymer-based nano-therapies to combat COVID-19 related respiratory injury: progress, prospects, and challenges

The recent coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) outbreak has increased at an alarming rate, representing a substantial cause of mortality worldwide. Respiratory injuries are major COVID-19 related complications, leading to poor lung circulation, tissue scarring, and airway obstruction. Despite an in-depth investigation of respiratory injury's molecular pathogenesis, effective treatments have yet to be developed. Moreover, early detection of viral infection is required to halt the disease-related long-term complications, including respiratory injuries. The currently employed detection technique (quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction or qRT-PCR) failed to meet this need at some point because it is costly, time-consuming, and requires higher expertise and technical skills. Polymer-based nanobiosensing techniques can be employed to overcome these limitations. Polymeric nanomaterials have the potential for clinical applications due to their versatile features like low cytotoxicity, biodegradability, bioavailability, biocompatibility, and specific delivery at the targeted site of action. In recent years, innovative polymeric nanomedicine approaches have been developed to deliver therapeutic agents and support tissue growth for the inflamed organs, including the lung. This review highlights the most recent advances of polymer-based nanomedicine approaches in infectious disease diagnosis and treatments. This paper also focuses on the potential of novel nanomedicine techniques that may prove to be therapeutically efficient in fighting against COVID-19 related respiratory injuries.

Comparing the Spanish flu and COVID-19 pandemics: Lessons to carry forward

Just as people living in the early 1900s experienced the horrors of World War I followed by the Spanish influenza epidemic, those of us surviving the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic will have our lives forever changed. Both pandemics defied the capabilities of prevailing healthcare and public health. Since there was no known cure in either pandemic, much depended on nurses to fight the battle against the viruses. History has shown pandemics are occurring more frequently and are unpredictable in timing and severity. Therefore, we need to place focus on the valuable lessons from the century's two pandemics to prepare for future global disease outbreaks. Lessons that will benefit nursing are the importance of continual preparation and planning, care coordination across communities and healthcare systems, and ensuring nurses have the necessary resources and training to perform their roles in an effective and safe manner.