ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The evolution of compliance and driving pressure in ARDS and the effects of time spent on noninvasive respiratory support prior to intubation have not been well studied. We conducted this study to assess the effect of the duration of noninvasive respiratory support prior to intubation (ie, noninvasive ventilation [NIV], high-flow nasal cannula [HFNC], or a combination of NIV and HFNC) on static compliance and driving pressure and retrospectively describe its trajectory over time for COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 ARDS while on mechanical ventilation. METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from one university-affiliated academic medical center, one rural magnet hospital, and 3 suburban community facilities. A total of 589 subjects were included: 55 COVID-19 positive, 137 culture positive, and 397 culture-negative subjects. Static compliance and driving pressure were calculated at each 8-h subject-ventilator assessment. RESULTS: Days of pre-intubation noninvasive respiratory support were associated with worse compliance and driving pressure but did not moderate any trajectory. COVID-19-positive subjects showed non-statistically significant worsening compliance by 0.08 units per subject-ventilator assessment (P = .24), whereas COVID-19-negative subjects who were either culture positive or negative showed statistically significant improvement (0.12 and 0.18, respectively; both P < .05); a statistically similar but inverse pattern was observed for driving pressure. CONCLUSIONS: In contrast to non-COVID-19 ARDS, COVID-19 ARDS was associated with a more ominous trajectory with no improvement in static compliance or driving pressures. Though there was no association between days of pre-intubation noninvasive respiratory support and mortality, its use was associated with worse overall compliance and driving pressure.
ABSTRACT
Given perceived similarities between coronavirus disease 2019 pneumonia and the acute respiratory distress syndrome, we explored whether awake self-proning improved outcomes in coronavirus disease 2019-infected patients treated in a rural medical center with limited resources during a significant local coronavirus disease 2019 outbreak. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected clinical data. SETTING: Single-center rural community-based medical center in Grand Island, NE. PATIENTS: One hundred five nonintubated, coronavirus disease-infected patients. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: After patients were educated on the benefits of awake self-proning, compliance was voluntary. The primary outcome was need for intubation during the hospital stay; secondary outcomes included serial peripheral capillary oxygen saturation measured by pulse oximetry to the Fio2 ratios, in-hospital mortality, and discharge disposition. Of 105 nonintubated, coronavirus disease-infected patients, 40 tolerated awake self-proning. Patients who were able to prone were younger and had lower disease severity. The risk of intubation was lower in proned patients after adjusting for disease severity using Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.09-0.96; p = 0.043) or Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II scores (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.10-0.91; p = 0.034). No prone patient died compared with 24.6% of patients who were not prone (p < 0.001; number needed to treat = 5; 95% CI, 3-8). The probability of being discharged alive and peripheral capillary oxygen saturation measured by pulse oximetry to the Fio2 ratios were statistically similar for both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Awake self-proning was associated with lower mortality and intubation rates in coronavirus disease 2019-infected patients. Prone positioning appears to be a safe and inexpensive strategy to improve outcomes and spare limited resources. Prospective efforts are needed to better delineate the effect of awake proning on oxygenation and to improve patients' ability to tolerate this intervention.