tetano
Editor, Senior Moderator
J Clin Anesth
. 2021 Jun 22;74:110406.
doi: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2021.110406. Online ahead of print.
Effect of prone versus supine position in COVID-19 patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Ee Xin Chua[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Syed Mohd Ikhmal Syed Mohd Zahir[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Ka Ting Ng[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Wan Yi Teoh[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Mohd Shahnaz Hasan[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Shairil Rahayu Binti Ruslan[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Mohammed F Abosamak[SUP] 4 [/SUP]
Affiliations
Abstract
Study objective: To review the effects of prone position and supine position on oxygenation parameters in patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19).
Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis of non-randomized trials.
Patients: Databases of EMBASE, MEDLINE and CENTRAL were systematically searched from its inception until March 2021.
Interventions: COVID-19 patients being positioned in the prone position either whilst awake or mechanically ventilated.
Measurements: Primary outcomes were oxygenation parameters (PaO₂/FiO₂ ratio, PaCO₂, SpO₂). Secondary outcomes included the rate of intubation and mortality rate.
Results: Thirty-five studies (n = 1712 patients) were included in this review. In comparison to the supine group, prone position significantly improved the PaO₂/FiO₂ ratio (study = 13, patients = 1002, Mean difference, MD 52.15, 95% CI 37.08 to 67.22; p < 0.00001) and SpO₂ (study = 11, patients = 998, MD 4.17, 95% CI 2.53 to 5.81; p ≤0.00001). Patients received prone position were associated with lower incidence of mortality (study = 5, patients = 688, Odd ratio, OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.80; p = 0.007). No significant difference was noted in the incidence of intubation rate (study = 5, patients = 626, OR 1.20, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.86; p = 0.42) between the supine and prone groups.
Conclusion: Our meta-analysis demonstrated that prone position improved PaO₂/FiO₂ ratio with better SpO₂ than supine position in COVID-19 patients. Given the limited number of studies with small sample size and substantial heterogeneity of measured outcomes, further studies are warranted to standardize the regime of prone position to improve the certainty of evidence. PROSPERO Registration: CRD42021234050.
Keywords: Coronavirus Disease 2019; Meta-analysis; Oxygenation; Prone; Supine.
. 2021 Jun 22;74:110406.
doi: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2021.110406. Online ahead of print.
Effect of prone versus supine position in COVID-19 patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Ee Xin Chua[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Syed Mohd Ikhmal Syed Mohd Zahir[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Ka Ting Ng[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Wan Yi Teoh[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Mohd Shahnaz Hasan[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Shairil Rahayu Binti Ruslan[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Mohammed F Abosamak[SUP] 4 [/SUP]
Affiliations
- PMID: 34182261
- DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2021.110406
Abstract
Study objective: To review the effects of prone position and supine position on oxygenation parameters in patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19).
Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis of non-randomized trials.
Patients: Databases of EMBASE, MEDLINE and CENTRAL were systematically searched from its inception until March 2021.
Interventions: COVID-19 patients being positioned in the prone position either whilst awake or mechanically ventilated.
Measurements: Primary outcomes were oxygenation parameters (PaO₂/FiO₂ ratio, PaCO₂, SpO₂). Secondary outcomes included the rate of intubation and mortality rate.
Results: Thirty-five studies (n = 1712 patients) were included in this review. In comparison to the supine group, prone position significantly improved the PaO₂/FiO₂ ratio (study = 13, patients = 1002, Mean difference, MD 52.15, 95% CI 37.08 to 67.22; p < 0.00001) and SpO₂ (study = 11, patients = 998, MD 4.17, 95% CI 2.53 to 5.81; p ≤0.00001). Patients received prone position were associated with lower incidence of mortality (study = 5, patients = 688, Odd ratio, OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.80; p = 0.007). No significant difference was noted in the incidence of intubation rate (study = 5, patients = 626, OR 1.20, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.86; p = 0.42) between the supine and prone groups.
Conclusion: Our meta-analysis demonstrated that prone position improved PaO₂/FiO₂ ratio with better SpO₂ than supine position in COVID-19 patients. Given the limited number of studies with small sample size and substantial heterogeneity of measured outcomes, further studies are warranted to standardize the regime of prone position to improve the certainty of evidence. PROSPERO Registration: CRD42021234050.
Keywords: Coronavirus Disease 2019; Meta-analysis; Oxygenation; Prone; Supine.