Duration Of Prone Positioning Research Articles

Macular hole surgery follow-up with spectral domain-optical coherence tomography-guided facedown posturing.

The main treatment for macular hole (MH) is pars plana vitrectomy, with or without internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling, followed by gas tamponade and face-down positioning (FDP). This study aims to present the anatomical and visual outcomes following MH repair with optical coherence tomography (OCT)-guided FDP. Thirty-two patients who underwent surgery for idiopathic MH were enrolled. The requirement for the prone position was lifted for those with MH closure observed under gas on postoperative day one OCT. Patients with unclosed MHs were instructed to maintain FDP until the 3rd day. Best-corrected visual acuity at preoperative, postoperative 1st month, and the last visit, closure time post-surgery, duration of prone position, and surgical success rate were recorded. Among the patients, 21 underwent phacovitrectomy + ILM peeling + gas tamponade, while 11 had vitrectomy + ILM peeling + gas tamponade. On postoperative day one, 28 out of 32 MHs closed, with 3 closures on day 3 and one on day 5. There were 18 stage two (56.3%), 13 stage three (40.6%) and 1 stage four (3.1%) MHs. The mean minimum MH diameter was 381.75 ± 68.07 (min 260-max 517) microns. All patients with MH closure time over postoperative day one had non-combined vitrectomy instead of phacovitrectomy. No late complications were observed. OCT-guided FDP approach yields excellent closure rates with no late complications and ensures good patient comfort.

Application and significance of prone position in the treatment of patients with severe pneumonia in intensive care unit

To investigate the effect of prone position on the prognosis of patients with severe pneumonia in intensive care unit (ICU). A retrospective cohort study was conducted. The patients with severe pneumonia admitted to the ICU of Qingdao Municipal Hospital from May 2022 to August 2023 were enrolled. The general information, etiology, underlying diseases, vital signs and laboratory indicators at ICU admission, clinical treatment and prognosis during ICU hospitalization were collected. The above clinical data of patients with different prognosis were compared. Multifactorial Logistic regression analysis was used to screen the related factors affecting survival during ICU in patients with severe pneumonia. The change in oxygenation index (PaO2/FiO2) of patients with severe pneumonia were observed at 1 hour before the first prone position, 1 hour after the first prone position, and 1 hour after the end of the first prone position. The effect of prone position on oxygenation in patients with severe pneumonia was analyzed. Spearman correlation analysis was used to investigate the correlation between the duration to first prone position and the change in the PaO2/FiO2 before and after prone position in patients with severe pneumonia. Finally, a total of 144 patients with severe pneumonia were enrolled, 45 survived and 99 died during ICU hospitalization, with a mortality of 68.8%. Compared with the survival group, the patients in the death group were older [years old: 81.00 (70.75, 86.00) vs. 71.00 (60.50, 81.50), P < 0.01], the proportion of pre-existing lung disease, heart rate (HR), respiratory rate (RR), blood lactic acid (Lac) and the ratio of continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) were higher [ratio of pre-existing lung disease: 23.2% (23/99) vs. 8.9% (4/45), HR (bpm): 99.61±22.47 vs. 91.49±18.76, RR (times/min): 22.50 (19.75, 29.25) vs. 20.00 (17.50, 24.50), Lac (mmol/L): 2.00 (1.55 , 3.25) vs. 1.60 (1.20, 1.95), CRRT ratio: 25.3% (25/99) vs. 6.7% (3/45), all P < 0.05], and the proportion of prone position was lower [41.4% (41/99) vs. 68.9% (31/45), P < 0.01]. Multifactorial Logistic regression analysis showed that age [odds ratio (OR) = 0.946, 95% confidence interval (95%CI) was 0.912-0.980, P = 0.002] and Lac (OR = 0.563, 95%CI was 0.340-0.930, P = 0.025) were negatively correlated with survival during ICU hospitalization in severe pneumonia patients, while prone position was positively correlated with survival (OR = 2.551, 95%CI was 1.067-6.095, P = 0.035), indicating that prone position was beneficial for improving ICU prognosis in severe pneumonia patients. The results of PaO2/FiO2 at different time points in prone position showed that PaO2/FiO2 at 1 hour of the first prone position in the patients with severe pneumonia was significantly higher than that at 1 hour before the first prone position [mmHg (1 mmHg ≈ 0.133 kPa): 146.69 (113.92, 257.25) vs. 111.75 (70.15, 212.20), P < 0.01], indicating that the prone position had a relevant effect on the improvement of oxygenation in patients. Spearman correlation analysis showed that the duration of the first prone position in patients with severe pneumonia was significantly and positively correlated with the improvement of oxygenation at 1 hour of the first prone position (r = 0.565, P < 0.001). The prone position is a therapeutic measure that can independently influence the prognosis of patients with severe pneumonia during ICU hospitalization. The prone position effectively improves oxygenation in patients with severe pneumonia and the first change in oxygenation in patients is related to the duration of the prone position.

Optimal Prone Position Duration in Patients With ARDS Due to COVID-19: The Omelette Pilot Trial.

Prone position (PP) has been widely used in the COVID-19 pandemic for ARDS management. However, the optimal length of a PP session is still controversial. This study aimed to evaluate the effects of prolonged versus standard PP duration in subjects with ARDS due to COVID-19. This was a single-center, randomized controlled, parallel, and open pilot trial including adult subjects diagnosed with severe ARDS due to COVID-19 receiving invasive mechanical ventilation that met criteria for PP between March-September 2021. Subjects were randomized to the intervention group of prolonged PP (48 h) versus the standard of care PP (∼16 h). The primary outcome variable for the trial was ventilator-free days (VFDs) to day 28. We enrolled 60 subjects. VFDs were not significantly different in the standard PP group (18 [interquartile range [IQR] 0-23] VFDs vs 7.5 [IQR 0-19.0] VFDs; difference, -10.5 (95% CI -3.5 to 19.0, P = .08). Prolonged PP was associated with longer time to successful extubation in survivors (13.00 [IQR 8.75-26.00] d vs 8.00 [IQR 5.00-10.25] d; difference, 5 [95% CI 0-15], P = .001). Prolonged PP was also significantly associated with longer ICU stay (18.5 [IQR 11.8-25.3] d vs 11.50 [IQR 7.75-25.00] d, P = .050) and extended administration of neuromuscular blockers (12.50 [IQR 5.75-20.00] d vs 5.0 [IQR 2.0-14.5] d, P = .005). Prolonged PP was associated with significant muscular impairment according to lower Medical Research Council values (59.6 [IQR 59.1-60.0] vs 56.5 [IQR 54.1-58.9], P = .02). Among subjects with severe ARDS due to COVID-19, there was no difference in 28-d VFDs between prolonged and standard PP strategy. However, prolonged PP was associated with a longer ICU stay, increased use of neuromuscular blockers, and greater muscular impairment. This suggests that prolonged PP is not superior to the current recommended standard of care.

Enteral nutrition practice in the prone position in patients with coronavirus disease 2019: An international one-day point prevalence analysis

Enteral nutrition (EN) in the prone position for severe respiratory failure is considered possible with care. However, the extent to which it is feasible, especially its association with the length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay, is unclear. Therefore, we investigated the relationship between the duration of prone position therapy and adequacy of EN delivery and explored factors associated with this relationship in an observational study of critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) who were actively treated in the prone position. This study was a secondary analysis of a worldwide one-day prevalence study in the COVID-19 era. We investigated the care and nutritional therapy provided to critically ill patients with COVID-19 admitted to ICU, along with ICU-related information. We targeted patients who received only tube feeding and analyzed the relationship between the duration of prone position, length of ICU stays, and nutrition delivery via EN. In addition, a multivariate analysis was performed to examine factors affecting the achievement of EN delivery of 20kcal/kg/day or more in patients who were placed in the prone position for at least 6h. A total of 399 patients who received only EN, excluding parenteral nutrition and oral intake, were included, of whom 58% received EN energy delivery of ≥20kcal/kg/day; this rate increased with the length of ICU stay, regardless of the duration of prone position. In a multivariate analysis of 121 patients who were in the prone position for at least 6h, the presence of dedicated dietitians in the ICU (OR=6.91, 95% CI=1.98 to 24.1, p<0.01) was associated with a higher energy delivery. Conversely, the use of muscle relaxants (OR=0.32, 95% CI=0.11 to 0.98, p=0.04) and presence of nutrition protocols (OR=0.24, 95% CI=0.07 to 0.77, p=0.02) was associated with a lower energy delivery. Patients with COVID-19 received adequate nutrition by EN even during prone position. Target EN delivery would be achieved with the introduction of prone position.

Importance of timing and training to implement awake prone positioning in patients with COVID-19: a single-center prospective observational study.

Awake prone positioning (APP) is broadly implemented in patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 related disease [coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)] admitted to hospital with severe respiratory distress syndrome. This prospective observational study aimed to explore the factors influencing the implementation of APP in patients with acute respiratory failure due to COVID-19. Patients with COVID-19, all hospitalized with positive X-ray findings and oxygen supplementation requirement, in the Respiratory Step-Down Unit of the Peking University Third Hospital between January 6th, 2023, and January 20th, 2023, were included in this study. Data regarding basic information, activities of daily living (ADLs) scores, oxygen therapy, vital signs, and duration of APP were collected to investigate the factors influencing prone positioning. Among the 134 patients included, 55.2% showed an improvement in oxygen saturation 1 hour after APP. Logistic regression revealed that the pre-APP heart rate (HR) [odds ratio (OR) =1.032; P=0.046] and peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO2) (OR =0.720; P<0.001) were the associated factors of the improvement in SpO2 after treatment. Multiple linear regression revealed that the ADL scores and pre-APP respiratory rate (RR) were the associated factors of the duration of prone positioning (P<0.01). The APP technical steering group effectively improved duration of APP. Patients with low SpO2 and increased HR before treatment showed greater improvement in oxygen saturation. Patients with lower tolerance to ADL but lower RRs were those to demonstrate a longer duration of prone positioning. This is pointing towards establishing the most favorable time window for APP during the course of COVID-19: after the ADLs have already decreased, but before significant tachypnea has appeared.

Adaptation and Uncertainty: A Qualitative Examination of Provider Experiences With Prone Positioning for Intubated Patients With COVID-19 ARDS

Prone positioning was widely adopted for use in patients with ARDS from COVID-19. However, proning was also delivered in ways that differed from historical evidence and practice. In implementation research, these changes are referred to as adaptations, and they occur constantly as evidence-based interventions are used in real-world practice. Adaptations can alter the delivered intervention, impacting patient and implementation outcomes. How have clinicians adapted prone positioning to COVID-19 ARDS, and what uncertainties remain regarding optimal proning use? We conducted a qualitative study using semi-structured interviews with ICU clinicians from two hospitals in Baltimore, MD, from February to July 2021. We interviewed physicians (MDs), registered nurses (RNs), respiratory therapists (RTs), advanced practice providers (APPs), and physical therapists (PTs) involved with proning mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19 ARDS. We used thematic analysis of interviews to classify proning adaptations and clinician uncertainties about best practice for prone positioning. Forty ICU clinicians (12 MDs, 4 APPs, 12 RNs, 7 RTs, and 5 PTs) were interviewed. Clinicians described several adaptations to the practice of prone positioning, including earlier proning initiation, extended duration of proning sessions, and less use of concomitant neuromuscular blockade. Clinicians expressed uncertainty regarding the optimal timing of initiation and duration of prone positioning. This uncertainty was viewed as a driver of practice variation. Although prescribers intended to use less deep sedation and paralysis in proned patients compared with historical evidence and practice, this raised concerns regarding patient comfort and safety amongst RNs and RTs. Prone positioning in patients with COVID-19 ARDS has been adapted from historically described practice. Understanding the impact of these adaptations on patient and implementation outcomes and addressing clinician uncertainties are priority areas for future research to optimize the use of prone positioning.

Evaluation of awake prone positioning effectiveness in moderate to severe COVID-19

Evidence mainly from high income countries suggests that lying in the prone position may be beneficial in patients with COVID-19 even if they are not receiving invasive ventilation. Studies indicate that increased duration of prone position may be associated with improved outcomes, but achieving this requires additional staff time and resources. Our study aims to support prolonged (≥ 8hours/day) awake prone positioning in patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 disease in Vietnam. We use a specialist team to support prone positioning of patients and wearable devices to assist monitoring vital signs and prone position and an electronic data registry to capture routine clinical data.

Effect of the duration of prone position in ARDS patients during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic

ObjectiveTo describe the characteristics of patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) due to bilateral COVID-19 pneumonia on invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), and to analyze the effect of prone position >24 h (prolonged) (PPP) compared to prone decubitus <24 h (PP). DesignA retrospective observational descriptive study was carried out, with uni- and bivariate analyses. SettingDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine. Hospital General Universitario de Elche (Elche, Alicante, Spain). ParticipantsPatients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia (2020−2021) on IMV due to moderate-severe ARDS, ventilated in prone position (PP). InterventionsIMV. PP maneuvers. Main variables of interestSociodemographic characteristics, analgo-sedation, neuromuscular blockade (NMB), PD duration, ICU stay and mortality, days of IMV, non-infectious complications, healthcare associated infections. ResultsFifty-one patients required PP, and of these, 31 (69.78%) required PPP. No differences were observed in terms of patient characteristics (gender, age, comorbidities, initial severity, antiviral and antiinflammatory treatment received). Patients on PPP had poorer tolerance to supine ventilation (61.29% vs 89.47%, p = 0.031), longer hospital stay (41 vs 30 days, p = 0.023), more days of IMV (32 vs 20 days, p = 0.032), longer duration of NMB (10.5 vs 3 days, p = 0.0002), as well as a higher percentage of episodes of orotracheal tube obstruction (48.39% vs 15%, p = 0.014). ConclusionsPPP was associated with greater resource use and complications in patients with moderate-severe ARDS due to COVID-19.

Efecto de la duración del decúbito prono en pacientes con SDRA durante la pandemia por SARS-CoV-2

ObjectiveTo describe the characteristics of patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome due to bilateral COVID-19 pneumonia on invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) and analyze the effect of prolonged prone decubitus>24h (PPD) compared to prone decubitus<24h (PD). DesignRetrospective observational descriptive study. Uni and bivariate analysis. SettingDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine. General University Hospital of Elche. ParticipantsPatients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia (2020–2021) in VMI for moderate-severe acute respiratory distress syndrome, ventilated in PD. InterventionsIMV. PD maneuvers. Main variables of interestSociodemographic; analgo-sedation; neuromuscular blockade; PD (duration), ICU stay and mortality, days of IMV; non-infectious complications; health care-associated infections. ResultsFifty-one patients required PD and of these 31 (69.78%) required PPD. No differences were found in patient characteristics (sex, age, comorbidities, initial severity, antiviral and anti-inflammatory treatment received). Patients on PPD had lower tolerance to supine ventilation (61.29 vs. 89.47%, p=0.031), longer hospital stay (41 vs. 30 days, p=0.023), more days of IMV (32 vs. 20 days, p=0.032), longer duration of neuromuscular blockade (10.5 vs. 3 days, p=0.0002), as well as a higher percentage of episodes of orotracheal tube obstruction (48.39 vs. 15%, p=0.014). ConclusionsPPD was associated with higher resource use and complications in patients with moderate-severe acute respiratory distress syndrome by COVID-19.

Prone Positioning During Venovenous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation for Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome-Better Together?

Prone Positioning During Venovenous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation for Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome-Better Together?

RADIOLOGICAL EVALUATION OF PEDICLE SCREW FIXATION IN THORACOLUMBAR SPINE STABILIZATION BY FREE HAND TECHNIQUE

Introduction: Pedicle screw xation is the preferred modality of xation throughout the vertebral column because of its proven effectiveness in stabilizing all three columns even in a deformed spine. With no use of imaging, the duration of the procedure is substantially reduced, this decrease reects progressively in post-operative prognosis as probability of surgical site infection is minimal. Further curtailed duration of prone position also helps in reducing the morbidity associated with the surgery.In this study we have attempted to evaluate the safety and accuracy of pedicle screw placement at thoracolumbar spine by free hand technique using post-operative computed tomography analysis. To evaluate the efcacy of free hand technique in sa Objectives; fe and accurate placement of pedicle screw post operatively using CT image. Study design : Prospective .Study population :Patients undergoing posterior stabilisation with pedicle screw xation by free hand technique. 100patients. March 2014 until September 2020. Department Sample size: Study period: Study setting: of Orthopaedics, Chengalpattu Govt Medical College and Hospital There is statis Results ; tically signicant association in ODI and VAS score among study participants during follow up(P&lt;0.05). Free hand technique provides a safe and acc Conclusion: urate method of pedicle screw placement without radiation harm to surgeon, theatre staffs and the patients.Free hand technique by reducing the duration of surgery, indirectly decrease complications like surgical site infection, anaesthetic complications

Extended prone positioning duration for COVID-19-related ARDS: benefits and detriments

BackgroundDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, many more patients were turned prone than before, resulting in a considerable increase in workload. Whether extending duration of prone position may be beneficial has received little attention. We report here benefits and detriments of a strategy of extended prone positioning duration for COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS).MethodsA eetrospective, monocentric, study was performed on intensive care unit patients with COVID-19-related ARDS who required tracheal intubation and who have been treated with at least one session of prone position of duration greater or equal to 24 h. When prone positioning sessions were initiated, patients were kept prone for a period that covered two nights. Data regarding the incidence of pressure injury and ventilation parameters were collected retrospectively on medical and nurse files of charts. The primary outcome was the occurrence of pressure injury of stage ≥ II during the ICU stay.ResultsFor the 81 patients included, the median duration of prone positioning sessions was 39 h [interquartile range (IQR) 34–42]. The cumulated incidence of stage ≥ II pressure injuries was 26% [95% CI 17–37] and 2.5% [95% CI 0.3–8.8] for stages III/IV pressure injuries. Patients were submitted to a median of 2 sessions [IQR 1–4] and for 213 (94%) prone positioning sessions, patients were turned over to supine position during daytime, i.e., between 9 AM and 6 PM. This increased duration was associated with additional increase in oxygenation after 16 h with the PaO2/FiO2 ratio increasing from 150 mmHg [IQR 121–196] at H+ 16 to 162 mmHg [IQR 124–221] before being turned back to supine (p = 0.017).ConclusionIn patients with extended duration of prone position up to 39 h, cumulative incidence for stage ≥ II pressure injuries was 26%, with 25%, 2.5%, and 0% for stage II, III, and IV, respectively. Oxygenation continued to increase significantly beyond the standard 16-h duration. Our results may have significant impact on intensive care unit staffing and patients’ respiratory conditions.Trial registration: Institutional review board 00006477 of HUPNVS, Université Paris Cité, APHP, with the reference: CER-2021-102, obtained on October 11th 2021. Registered at Clinicaltrials (NCT05124197).

Pressure Injuries Due to Prone Positioning in Patients with COVID-19.

Preemptive interventions are needed to prevent pressure injuries in patients with COVID-19 who are placed in the prone position.Risk factors for pressure injuries in these patients include severe obesity, a long duration of prone positioning, male sex, a high D-dimer level, and the use of commercial endotracheal tube holders.

Is prolonged period of prone position effective and safe in mechanically ventilated patients with SARS-CoV-2? A randomized clinical trial

ABSTRACT Background The novel coronavirus has been recently spreading throughout the world, causing severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS-CoV-2) that necessitates mechanical ventilation. Prone position ventilation is an established method to improve oxygenation in severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Different protocols were suggested and evaluated for prone position (PP) cycles duration. We performed a randomized controlled study to compare the standard 16 h prone ventilation against extended 24 h prone ventilation in terms of safety and efficacy. Methods A total of 52 patients were divided into two groups. Group (A) proning cycles that lasted for 16 h every 24 h, Group (B): prolonged proning cycles that lasted for continuous 24 h followed by 6 h supine position. Both groups received lung-protective ventilation, arterial blood gases were sampled, static lung compliance was measured before proning and one hour after return to supine position. After three successive cycles, the mean value was measured and recorded. Results We found that extending the duration of prone position (PP) sessions from 16 h to 24 h was associated with a significant improvement in PaO2/FiO2, significant elevation in static lung compliance and non-significant changes in the rate of extubation. 24 h PP was proven to be safe, with no significant elevation in the rate of complications, and nearly the same impact on survival and length of hospital stay. Conclusion Extending PP ventilation to 24 h for COVID-19 ARDS patients is safe and effective. Trial registration: the trial w registered on November 2021 in ClinicalTrials.gov (CT05109624).

Effect of Awake Prone Positioning on Endotracheal Intubation in Patients With COVID-19 and Acute Respiratory Failure

The efficacy and safety of prone positioning is unclear in nonintubated patients with acute hypoxemia and COVID-19. To evaluate the efficacy and adverse events of prone positioning in nonintubated adult patients with acute hypoxemia and COVID-19. Pragmatic, unblinded randomized clinical trial conducted at 21 hospitals in Canada, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and the US. Eligible adult patients with COVID-19 were not intubated and required oxygen (≥40%) or noninvasive ventilation. A total of 400 patients were enrolled between May 19, 2020, and May 18, 2021, and final follow-up was completed in July 2021. Patients were randomized to awake prone positioning (n = 205) or usual care without prone positioning (control; n = 195). The primary outcome was endotracheal intubation within 30 days of randomization. The secondary outcomes included mortality at 60 days, days free from invasive mechanical ventilation or noninvasive ventilation at 30 days, days free from the intensive care unit or hospital at 60 days, adverse events, and serious adverse events. Among the 400 patients who were randomized (mean age, 57.6 years [SD, 12.83 years]; 117 [29.3%] were women), all (100%) completed the trial. In the first 4 days after randomization, the median duration of prone positioning was 4.8 h/d (IQR, 1.8 to 8.0 h/d) in the awake prone positioning group vs 0 h/d (IQR, 0 to 0 h/d) in the control group. By day 30, 70 of 205 patients (34.1%) in the prone positioning group were intubated vs 79 of 195 patients (40.5%) in the control group (hazard ratio, 0.81 [95% CI, 0.59 to 1.12], P = .20; absolute difference, -6.37% [95% CI, -15.83% to 3.10%]). Prone positioning did not significantly reduce mortality at 60 days (hazard ratio, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.62 to 1.40], P = .54; absolute difference, -1.15% [95% CI, -9.40% to 7.10%]) and had no significant effect on days free from invasive mechanical ventilation or noninvasive ventilation at 30 days or on days free from the intensive care unit or hospital at 60 days. There were no serious adverse events in either group. In the awake prone positioning group, 21 patients (10%) experienced adverse events and the most frequently reported were musculoskeletal pain or discomfort from prone positioning (13 of 205 patients [6.34%]) and desaturation (2 of 205 patients [0.98%]). There were no reported adverse events in the control group. In patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure from COVID-19, prone positioning, compared with usual care without prone positioning, did not significantly reduce endotracheal intubation at 30 days. However, the effect size for the primary study outcome was imprecise and does not exclude a clinically important benefit. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04350723.

Application of the prone position during COVID-19 pandemic. (PROCOV). An international survey of clinicians

Background Benefits of the prone position in ARDS are well established, and the evidence of its benefits for the COVID-19 patients are growing. However, the clinical utilization of such a maneuver is less established. We attempted to analyze the clinician’s utilization and attitude of the prone position and what is the main drive for its usage. Methods An international survey of eight questions. The questionnaire was anonymous and included the country of practice, percentage of patients with COVID-19 they have placed in the prone position while undergoing mechanical ventilation, most important factor that determined the need for the prone position (SpO2, PaO2:FiO2, FIO2, PEEP), duration of prone position in hours/day, use of neuro-muscular blocking agents, body position (flat, trendelenburg, reverse trendelenburg), the use of a specific protocol for the prone position, if they believe that prone position is beneficial, and if their practice will change or not. The survey was active for five months. Statistical analysis included frequencies of each response, as well as subgroup analyses designed to identify potential correlates of longer or shorter proning durations. The questionnaire assessed clinicians optimism regarding the continuing use of proning in the future, and how different cutoffs for proning initiation may be associated with attitudes towards proning. Associations between categorical variables were analyzed using Fisher’s exact test. A P-value of &lt; 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results are expressed in Means ± Standard Deviation (SD) Results 294 questionnaires were collected from 35 countries with 78% of responders from the USA. Median duration of proning was 14.8 ± 2.8 hours per day. 74% of clinicians utilized an established protocol for proning their patients. The decision to initiate proning was non-significant and split between the use of oxygen saturation SpO2 (30%) mean 92.44 ± 5.61, PaO2:FiO2 ratio (28%) mean 188.44 ± 57.36, FiO2 mean 78.6 ± 15.65, PEEP mean 12.96 ± 4.66, or immediate prone positioning following intubation (22%). 41.2% of surveyed utilize the prone position in 25-50%, average percent patients proned calculated at 7.1%. Estimated 77% of respondents reported prone positioning to be helpful in 50% or less of cases. 91% of responders used NMB either always or frequently, and there was statistical significance between the use of NMB and perceived benefits of proning (P &lt; 0.001). 74% of those surveyed use a protocol for proning, the use of protocol and the perceived benefits of proning was statistically significant (P &lt;0.001). Conclusion There are few agreements between clinicians on the duration of the proning sessions and use of NMB and using a protocol for proning. There was no agreement on the trigger of the prone position or the belief of its usefulness. This ambiguity should trigger an evidence-based ARDS management using the prone position in COVID-19 patients.

The Effect of Prone and Awake Prone Position Duration on the Outcomes of COVID-19 Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

The Effect of Prone and Awake Prone Position Duration on the Outcomes of COVID-19 Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Prone Positioning as a Potential Risk Factor for Deep Vein Thrombosis in COVID-19 Patients: A Hypothesis Generating Observation.

Aims of the study: Virchow’s triad with stasis, activated coagulation, and endothelial damage is common in SARS-CoV2. Therefore, we sought to retrospectively assess whether the duration of prone position may serve as a risk factor for deep vein thrombosis in critically ill patients. Methods: In this single center retrospective study of a tertiary referral hospital, patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) due to COVID-19 pneumonia admitted to critical care underwent venous ultrasound screening for deep vein thrombosis (DVT). Data on DVT diagnosis, duration of prone positioning, demographic, respiratory, and laboratory parameters were retrospectively collected and compared between DVT and non-DVT patients. Results: 21 patients with ARDS from COVID-19 pneumonia were analyzed. DVT was detected in 11 (52%) patients (76.2% male, median age 64 (58; 68.5) years, median body mass index 31 (27; 33.8) kg/m2). In patients diagnosed with DVT, median prone ventilation had been maintained twice as long as compared to patients without DVT (57 (19; 72) versus 28 (0; 56.3) h, p = 0.227) on ICU day 5 with a trend towards longer prone position time (71 (19; 104) versus 28 (0; 73) h, p = 0.06) on ICU day 7. Conclusions: Prone ventilation and constitutional factors may constitute an additional risk factor for DVT in COVID-19 patients. Since recent studies have shown that therapeutic anticoagulation does not impact the occurrence of thromboembolic events, it may be worthwhile to consider mechanical factors potentially affecting blood flow stasis in this high-risk population. However, due to the limited number of patients, our observations should only be considered as hypothesis-generating. Future studies, sufficiently powered and preferably prospective, will be needed to confirm our hypothesis.

Determine the Impact of Prone Positioning in Covid-19 Patients

Objective:To determine the effectiveness of prone positioning in patients of covid-19 deisease presented with respiratory failure. Study Design: Retrospective/Observational study Place and Duration: Medicine department of BKMC/MMC, Mardan and Mohiuddin Teaching Hospital, Mirpur AJK for six months during the period from August 2020 to January 2021. Methods: Total 100 patients of respiratory failure admitted to ICU were included in this study. Patients detailed demographics age,sex and body mass index were recorded after taking informed written consent. Patients were aged between 25-80years.Patients were divided in to two groups I and II. Group A had 50 COVID-19 patients underwent prone position and group Bwith50 patients taken as control. Chest X-ray of both groups were taken. Patients of group A were kept in prone position whilegroup B received invasive ventilation and follow up was taken in duration of 15-days. Reduction of intubation rate, mortality, hospital stay and complications were identified among both groups. Complete data was analyzed by SPSS 22.0 version. Results:Majority of the patients was males 76% and the rest were females 24%. Mean age of the patients in prone positioning group was 52.42±13.18 years with mean BMI 26.14±7.13 kg/m2 and in control group A itwas 50.44±14.65 years with mean BMI 26.41±7.13 kg/m2. 55% patients had moderate and 45% had severe covid-19 disease. Mean duration of prone position was 5.14±6.31 hours. Most of the patients 81% had bilateral lung involvementinterstitial infiltrates. Fever, cough and dyspnea were the most common symptom found in both groups. Mean PF ratio was increases in prone group as compared to controlled group. Mean hospital stay in group A was 12.9±4.76 days and in group B mean hospital stay was 17.32±10.24 days. Mortality in group A was 3 (3%) and in group Bmortality was found in 7 (7%). No any severe complications were observed among both groups. Conclusion:We concludedin this study that the use of prone position among patients of COVID-19 was effective and safe method to reduce intubation, mortality and hospital stay. There was no any complication were found after this treatment. Keywords: Prone Position, Covid-19, Respiratory Failure, Mortality

Difference between prolonged versus standard duration of prone position in COVID-19 patients: a retrospective study.

article: Difference between prolonged versus standard duration of prone position in COVID-19 patients: a retrospective study - Minerva Anestesiologica 2021 December;87(12):1383-5 - Minerva Medica - Journals