Awake prone positioning in acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure.

Awake prone positioning (APP) of patients with acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure gained considerable attention during the early phases of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Prior to the pandemic, reports of APP were limited to case series in patients with influenza and in immunocompromised patients, with encouraging results in terms of tolerance and oxygenation improvement. Prone positioning of awake patients with acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure appears to result in many of the same physiological changes improving oxygenation seen in invasively ventilated patients with moderate-severe acute respiratory distress syndrome. A number of randomised controlled studies published on patients with varying severity of COVID-19 have reported apparently contrasting outcomes. However, there is consistent evidence that more hypoxaemic patients requiring advanced respiratory support, who are managed in higher care environments and who can be prone for several hours, benefit most from APP use. We review the physiological basis by which prone positioning results in changes in lung mechanics and gas exchange and summarise the latest evidence base for APP primarily in COVID-19. We examine the key factors that influence the success of APP, the optimal target populations for APP and the key unknowns that will shape future research.

Awake Prone Positioning in Non-Intubated Patients With Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure Due to COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Awake prone positioning (APP) has been advocated to improve oxygenation and prevent intubation of patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This paper aims to synthesize the available evidence on the efficacy of APP. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of proportional outcomes from observational studies to compare intubation rate in patients treated with APP or with standard care. RESULTS: A total of 46 published and 4 unpublished observational studies that included 2,994 subjects were included, of which 921 were managed with APP and 870 were managed with usual care. APP was associated with significant improvement of oxygenation parameters in 381 cases of 19 studies that reported this outcome. Among the 41 studies assessing intubation rates (870 subjects treated with APP and 852 subjects treated with usual care), the intubation rate was 27% (95% CI 19-37%) as compared to 30% (95% CI 20-42%) (P = .71), even when duration of application, use of adjunctive respiratory assist device (high-flow nasal cannula or noninvasive ventilation), and severity of oxygenation deficit were taken into account. There appeared to be a trend toward improved mortality when APP was compared with usual care (11% vs 22%), which was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: APP was associated with improvement of oxygenation but did not reduce the intubation rate in subjects with acute respiratory failure due to COVID-19. This finding is limited by the high heterogeneity and the observational nature of included studies. Randomized controlled clinical studies are needed to definitively assess whether APP could improve key outcome such as intubation rate and mortality in these patients.

Burnout among respiratory therapists during COVID-19 pandemic.

Background: Respiratory therapists (RTs) faced many unpredicted challenges and higher stress levels while managing critically ill patients with the coronavirus disease (COVID-19). This study's primary objective was to evaluate the compassion satisfaction and compassion fatigue among RTs in the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: This cross-sectional, descriptive, survey-based study conducted from July 2020 to August 2020 was administered to all active members of the American Association of Respiratory Care via AARConnect. RTs' characteristics including personal, job-specific, and organizational factors were collected. Professional Quality of Life Scale (ProQOL, version 5) was used to measure compassion satisfaction and fatigue. Results: A total of 218 participants fully completed the survey, 143 (65.6%) were female, 107 (49.1%) were between 35 and 54 years of age and 72 (33%) were above 55 years of age. Compassion satisfaction was moderate in 123 (56.4%) and high in 93 (42.7%) RTs. Higher compassion satisfaction was found in RTs who have a higher salary (P = 0.003), work overtime (P = 0.01), hold leadership positions (P < 0.001), work in research/education (P < 0.001) and work for departments that provide help in managing burnout and stress (P = 0.007) and that promote a positive work environment (P < 0.001). Burnout score was low in 90 (41.3%) and moderate in 127 (58.3%) RTs. Higher burnout was found among younger RTs (P = 0.019), those with fewer years of experience (P = 0.013) and those with less than a year at their current job (P = 0.045). Secondary traumatic stress (STS) was low in 106 (48.6%) and moderate in 112 (51.4%) RTs. Higher STS levels were noted among younger RTs (P = 0.02) and RTs with lower education levels (P = 0.016). Conclusion: This survey study identified various personal, job and organizational related factors associated with increased compassion satisfaction as well as compassion fatigue among RTs.

Identification and Prevention of Extubation Failure by Using an Automated Continuous Monitoring Alert Versus Standard Care.

BACKGROUND: Postextubation monitoring helps identify patients at risk of developing respiratory failure. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of our standard respiratory therapist (RT) assessment tool versus an automated continuous monitoring alert to initiate postextubation RT-driven care on the re-intubation rate. METHODS: This was a single-center randomized clinical trial from March 2020 to September 2021 of adult subjects who received mechanical ventilation for > 24 h and underwent planned extubation in the ICU. The subjects were assigned to the standard RT assessment tool or an automated monitoring alert to identify the need for postextubation RT-driven care. The primary outcome was the need for re-intubation due to respiratory failure within 72 h. Secondary outcomes included re-intubation within 7 d, ICU and hospital lengths of stay, hospital mortality, ICU cost, and RT time associated with patient assessment and therapy provision. RESULTS: Of 234 randomized subjects, 32 were excluded from the primary analysis due to disruption in RT-driven care during the surge of patients with COVID-19, and 1 subject was excluded due to delay in the automated monitoring initiation. Analysis of the primary outcome included 85 subjects assigned to the standard RT assessment group and 116 assigned to the automated monitoring alert group to initiate RT-driven care. There was no significant difference between the study groups in re-intubation rate, median length of stay, mortality, or ICU costs. The RT time associated with patient assessment (P < .001) and therapy provided (P = .031) were significantly lower in the automated continuous monitoring alert group. CONCLUSIONS: In subjects who received mechanical ventilation for > 24 h, there were no significant outcome or cost differences between our standard RT assessment tool or an automated monitoring alert to initiate postextubation RT-driven care. Using an automated continuous monitoring alert to initiate RT-driven care saved RT time. (ClinicalTrials.gov registration NCT04231890).

Lung ultrasound response to awake prone positioning predicts the need for intubation in patients with COVID-19 induced acute hypoxemic respiratory failure: an observational study.

BACKGROUND: Awake prone positioning (APP) reduces the intubation rate in COVID-19 patients treated by high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC). However, the lung aeration response to APP has not been addressed. We aimed to explore the lung aeration response to APP by lung ultrasound (LUS). METHODS: This two-center, prospective, observational study enrolled patients with COVID-19-induced acute hypoxemic respiratory failure treated by HFNC and APP. LUS score was recorded 5-10 min before, 1 h after APP, and 5-10 min after supine in the first APP session within the first three days. The primary outcome was LUS score changes in the first three days. Secondary outcomes included changes in SpO2/FiO2 ratio, respiratory rate and ROX index (SpO2/FiO2/respiratory rate) related to APP, and the rate of treatment success (patients who avoided intubation). RESULTS: Seventy-one patients were enrolled. LUS score decreased from 20 (interquartile range [IQR] 19-24) to 19 (18-21) (p < 0.001) after the first APP session, and to 19 (18-21) (p < 0.001) after three days. Compared to patients with treatment failure (n = 20, 28%), LUS score reduction after the first three days in patients with treatment success (n = 51) was greater (- 2.6 [95% confidence intervals - 3.1 to - 2.0] vs 0 [- 1.2 to 1.2], p = 0.001). A decrease in dorsal LUS score > 1 after the first APP session was associated with decreased risk for intubation (Relative risk 0.25 [0.09-0.69]). APP daily duration was correlated with LUS score reduction in patients with treatment success, especially in dorsal lung zones (r = - 0.76; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19 and treated by HFNC, APP reduced LUS score. The reduction in dorsal LUS scores after APP was associated with treatment success. The longer duration on APP was correlated with greater lung aeration. Trial registration This study was prospectively registered on clinicaltrials.gov on April 22, 2021. Identification number NCT04855162 .

Awake prone positioning for non-intubated patients with COVID-19-related acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Awake prone positioning has been broadly utilised for non-intubated patients with COVID-19-related acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure, but the results from published randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in the past year are contradictory. We aimed to systematically synthesise the outcomes associated with awake prone positioning, and evaluate these outcomes in relevant subpopulations. METHODS: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, two independent groups of researchers searched MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, MedRxiv, BioRxiv, and ClinicalTrials.gov for RCTs and observational studies (with a control group) of awake prone positioning in patients with COVID-19-related acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure published in English from Jan 1, 2020, to Nov 8, 2021. We excluded trials that included patients intubated before or at enrolment, paediatric patients (ie, younger than 18 years), or trials that did not include the supine position in the control group. The same two independent groups screened studies, extracted the summary data from published reports, and assessed the risk of bias. We used a random-effects meta-analysis to pool individual studies. We used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach to assess the certainty and quality of the evidence. The primary outcome was the reported cumulative intubation risk across RCTs, and effect estimates were calculated as risk ratios (RR;95% CI). The analysis was primarily conducted on RCTs, and observational studies were used for sensitivity analyses. No serious adverse events associated with awake prone positioning were reported. The study protocol was prospectively registered with PROSPERO, CRD42021271285. FINDINGS: A total of 1243 studies were identified, we assessed 138 full-text articles and received the aggregated results of three unpublished RCTs; therefore, after exclusions, 29 studies were included in the study. Ten were RCTs (1985 patients) and 19 were observational studies (2669 patients). In ten RCTs, awake prone positioning compared with the supine position significantly reduced the need for intubation in the overall population (RR 0·84 [95% CI 0·72-0·97]). A reduced need for intubation was shown among patients who received advanced respiratory support (ie, high-flow nasal cannula or non-invasive ventilation) at enrolment (RR 0·83 [0·71-0·97]) and in intensive care unit (ICU) settings (RR 0·83 [0·71-0·97]) but not in patients receiving conventional oxygen therapy (RR 0·87 [0·45-1·69]) or in non-ICU settings (RR 0·88 [0·44-1·76]). No obvious risk of bias and publication bias was found among the included RCTs for the primary outcome. INTERPRETATION: In patients with COVID-19-related acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure, awake prone positioning reduced the need for intubation, particularly among those requiring advanced respiratory support and those in ICU settings. Awake prone positioning should be used in patients who have acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19 and require advanced respiratory support or are treated in the ICU. FUNDING: OpenAI, Rice Foundation, National Institute for Health Research, and Oxford Biomedical Research Centre.

Early versus late awake prone positioning in non-intubated patients with COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Awake prone positioning (APP) is widely used in the management of patients with coronavirus disease (COVID-19). The primary objective of this study was to compare the outcome of COVID-19 patients who received early versus late APP. METHODS: Post hoc analysis of data collected for a randomized controlled trial (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04325906). Adult patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure secondary to COVID-19 who received APP for at least one hour were included. Early prone positioning was defined as APP initiated within 24 h of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) start. Primary outcomes were 28-day mortality and intubation rate. RESULTS: We included 125 patients (79 male) with a mean age of 62 years. Of them, 92 (73.6%) received early APP and 33 (26.4%) received late APP. Median time from HFNC initiation to APP was 2.25 (0.8-12.82) vs 36.35 (30.2-75.23) hours in the early and late APP group (p < 0.0001), respectively. Average APP duration was 5.07 (2.0-9.05) and 3.0 (1.09-5.64) hours per day in early and late APP group (p < 0.0001), respectively. The early APP group had lower mortality compared to the late APP group (26% vs 45%, p = 0.039), but no difference was found in intubation rate. Advanced age (OR 1.12 [95% CI 1.0-1.95], p = 0.001), intubation (OR 10.65 [95% CI 2.77-40.91], p = 0.001), longer time to initiate APP (OR 1.02 [95% CI 1.0-1.04], p = 0.047) and hydrocortisone use (OR 6.2 [95% CI 1.23-31.1], p = 0.027) were associated with increased mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Early initiation (< 24 h of HFNC use) of APP in acute hypoxemic respiratory failure secondary to COVID-19 improves 28-day survival. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04325906.