{"title":"Clinical Outcomes of Routine Awake Prone Positioning in COVID-19 Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.","authors":"Woon Hean Chong, Biplab K Saha, Chee Keat Tan","doi":"10.14712/23362936.2022.14","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>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.</p>","PeriodicalId":35490,"journal":{"name":"Prague medical report","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Prague medical report","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14712/23362936.2022.14","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
Abstract
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.
在2019冠状病毒病(COVID-19)出现之前,已证明俯卧可以改善急性缺氧性呼吸衰竭患者的氧合,并可在非重症监护环境中进行。COVID-19大流行进一步证明了这一好处,导致了清醒俯卧位(APP)。我们评估了常规APP与标准护理在预防非插管缺氧COVID-19患者死亡和有创机械通气(IMV)方面的疗效。从2020年1月1日至2022年1月15日,我们使用PubMed、Cochrane Library、Scopus和medRxiv数据库来识别随机对照试验(RCTs)。常规APP组鼓励自我倾向,标准治疗组根据当地临床实际进行护理,允许APP交叉治疗作为抢救治疗。我们纳入了8项COVID-19随机对照试验,评估809名APP患者和822名标准治疗患者。APP组IMV需求较低(26.5% vs. 30.9%;OR -比值比0.77;P=0.03),亚组分析显示获益更大(32.5% vs. 39.1%;或0.75;P=0.02),主要依靠无创机械通气(NIMV)和高流量鼻插管(HFNC)供氧。发生IMV的时间相似(平均8.3天vs. 10.0天;P=0.66)。主要接受补充氧和非换气面罩的患者氧合参数有所改善,但无统计学意义。其他结果包括全因住院死亡率、住院和ICU(重症监护病房)住院时间以及不良事件具有可比性。APP似乎是减少IMV需求的一种重要方式,特别是在那些需要NIMV和HFNC的情况下。