Hospital-Level Availability of Prone Positioning in Massachusetts ICUs.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Law AC
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7159431 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Gene expression microarrays have made a profound impact in biomedical research. The diversity of platforms and analytical methods has made comparison of data from multiple platforms very challenging. In this study, we describe a framework for comparisons across platforms and laboratories. We have attempted to include nearly all the available commercial and “in-house” platforms. Using probe sequences matched at the exon level improved consistency of measurements across the different microarray platforms compared to annotation-based matches. Generally, consistency was good for highly expressed genes, and variable for genes with lower expression values as confirmed by QRT-PCR. Concordance of measurements was higher between laboratories on the same platform than across platforms. We demonstrate that, after stringent pre-processing, commercial arrays were more consistent than “in-house” arrays, and by most measures, one-dye platforms were more consistent than two-dye platforms. Keywords: cross platform microarrays
2006-06-01 | GSE4833 | GEO
Project description:Prone position has been used in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) patients for more than 40 years in ICU. After having demonstrated its capability to significantly improve oxygenation in a large number of patients, sometimes dramatically, this procedure has been found to prevent ventilator-induced lung injury, the primary concern for the intensivists managing ARDS patients. Over the time, several trials have been done, which regularly improved and refined from each other. At the end, significant improvement in survival has been demonstrated in the most severe ARDS patients, at a threshold of 100-150 mmHg PaO2/FiO2 ratio. The effect of proning on survival cannot be predicted and seems unrelated with both severity of oxygenation impairment and oxygenation response to proning. The rate of complication is declining with the increase in centers expertise. The pressure sores are more frequent in prone and require a special attention. Prone position is a key component of lung protective mechanical ventilation and should be used as a first line therapy in association with low tidal volume and neuromuscular blocking agents in patients with severe ARDS.
| S-EPMC5537107 | biostudies-other
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7427393 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundProne positioning has become a standard therapy in acute respiratory distress syndrome to improve oxygenation and decrease mortality. However, little is known about prone positioning in lung transplant recipients. This large, singe-center analysis investigated whether prone positioning improves gas exchange after lung transplantation.MethodsClinical data of 583 patients were analyzed. Prone position was considered in case of impaired gas exchange Pao2/fraction of oxygen in inhaled air (<250), signs of edema after lung transplantation, and/or evidence of reperfusion injury. Patients with hemodynamic instability or active bleeding were not proned. Impact of prone positioning (n = 165) on gas exchange, early outcome and survival were determined and compared with patients in supine positioning (n = 418).ResultsPatients in prone position were younger, more likely to have interstitial lung disease, and had a higher lung allocation score. Patients were proned for a median of 19 hours (interquartile range,15-26) hours). They had significantly lower Pao2/fraction of oxygen in inhaled air (227 ± 96 vs 303 ± 127 mm Hg, P = .004), and lower lung compliance (24.8 ± 9.1 mL/mbar vs 29.8 ± 9.7 mL/mbar, P < .001) immediately after lung transplantation. Both values significantly improved after prone positioning for 24 hours (Pao2/fraction of oxygen ratio: 331 ± 91 mm Hg; lung compliance: 31.7 ± 20.2 mL/mbar). Survival at 90 days was similar between the 2 groups (93% vs 96%, P = .105).ConclusionsProne positioning led to a significant improvement in lung compliance and oxygenation after lung transplantation. Prospective studies are needed to confirm the benefit of prone positioning in lung transplantation.
| S-EPMC10162468 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Massachusetts General Hospital Atrial Fibrillation Study
| PRJNA297616 | ENA
Project description:BackgroundProne positioning (PP) has shown to improve survival in patients with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). To this point, it is unclear if PP is also beneficial for ARDS patients treated with veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV ECMO) support.MethodsWe report retrospective data of a single-centre registry of patients with severe ARDS requiring VV ECMO support between October 2010 and May 2018. Patients were allocated to the PP group if PP was performed during VV ECMO treatment or the supine positioning group. VV ECMO weaning success and hospital survival were analysed before and after propensity score matching.ResultsA total of 158 patients could be analysed, and 38 patients (24.1%) received PP. There were no significant differences in VV ECMO weaning rate (47.4% vs. 46.7%, p = 0.94) and hospital survival (36.8% vs. 36.7%, p = 0.98) between the prone and supine groups, respectively. The analysis of 38 propensity score matched pairs also showed no difference in hospital survival (36.8% vs. 36.8%, p = 1.0) or VV ECMO weaning rate (47.4% vs. 44.7%, p = 0.82). Hospital survival was superior in the subgroup of patients treated with early PP (cutoff < 17 h via Youden's Index) as compared to late or no PP (81.8% vs. 33.3%, p = 0.02).ConclusionIn this propensity score matched cohort of severe ARDS patients requiring VV ECMO support, prone positioning at any time was not associated with improved weaning or survival. However, early initiation of prone positioning was linked to a significant reduction of hospital mortality.
| S-EPMC7341706 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7919146 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe benefits of prone positioning in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) have been known for many years. While some controversy exists regarding whether coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia should be treated with the same therapeutic strategies as for non-COVID ARDS, the Surviving Sepsis Campaign still provide a weak recommendation to utilise prone positioning in this setting.AimsThe aims of this study are to ascertain if prone positioning improves oxygenation significantly in mechanically ventilated patients with severe COVID-19 ARDS and to describe the feasibility of frequent prone positioning in an Irish regional hospital intensive care unit (ICU) with limited prior experience.MethodsIn this retrospective, observational cohort study, we investigate if the PaO2/FiO2 ratio and ventilatory ratio improve during and following prone positioning, and whether this improvement correlates with patient baseline characteristics or survival.ResultsBetween March 2020 and 2021, 12 patients underwent prone positioning while mechanically ventilated for severe COVID ARDS. Sixty-six percent were male, mean age 60.9 (± 10.5), mean BMI 33.5 (± 6.74) and median APACHE II score on admission to ICU was 10.5 (7.25-16.3). Further, 83% were proned within 24 h of being intubated due to refractory hypoxaemia. PaO2/FiO2 ratio improved from 11.6 kPa (9.80-13.8) to 15.80 kPa (13.1-19.6) while prone, p < 0.0001.ConclusionsWe found prone positioning to be a safe method of significantly improving oxygenation in mechanically ventilated patients with severe COVID-19 ARDS. We did not find a relationship between patient baseline characteristics nor illness severity and degree of PaO2/FiO2 ratio improvement, nor did we find a relationship between degree of PaO2/FiO2 ratio improvement and survival.
| S-EPMC9274965 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSafe, effective, and easily implementable treatments that reduce the progression of respiratory failure in COVID-19 are urgently needed. Despite the increased adoption of prone positioning during the pandemic, the effectiveness of this technique on progression of respiratory failure among nonintubated patients is unclear.Research questionWhat is the effectiveness of smartphone-guided self-prone positioning recommendations and instructions compared with usual care in reducing progression of respiratory failure among nonintubated patients with COVID-19?Study design and methodsAwake Prone Position for Early Hypoxemia in COVID-19 (APPEX-19) is a multicenter randomized clinical trial that randomized nonintubated adults with COVID-19 on < 6 L/min of supplemental oxygen to receive a smartphone-guided self-prone positioning intervention or usual care. The primary outcome was the composite of respiratory deterioration (an increase in supplemental oxygen requirement) or ICU transfer. Using a Bayesian statistical approach, the posterior probability of superiority within each treatment arm (superiority threshold 95%) was calculated.ResultsThe trial was stopped early for slow enrollment. A total of 293 participants were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis (159 self-prone positioning intervention and 134 usual care). Among participants who self-reported body positioning (n = 139 [70 intervention, 69 usual care]), 71.4% in the intervention arm and 59.4% in the usual care arm attempted prone positioning. Thirty-one participants (posterior mean, 24.7%; 95% credible interval, 18.6-31.4) receiving usual care and 32 participants (posterior mean, 22.1%; 95% credible interval, 16.6-28.1) receiving the self-prone positioning intervention experienced the primary outcome; the posterior probability of superiority for the self-prone positioning intervention was 72.1%, less than the 95% threshold for superiority. Adverse events occurred in 26.9% of participants in the usual care arm and in 11.9% of participants in the intervention arm.InterpretationAmong nonintubated patients with COVID-19, smartphone-guided self-prone positioning recommendations and instructions did not promote strong adherence to prone positioning.Clinical trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT04344587; URL: www.Clinicaltrialsgov.
| S-EPMC9116967 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesTo assess the effectiveness of prone positioning to reduce the risk of death or respiratory failure in non-critically ill patients admitted to hospital with covid-19.DesignMulticentre pragmatic randomised clinical trial.Setting15 hospitals in Canada and the United States from May 2020 until May 2021.ParticipantsEligible patients had a laboratory confirmed or a clinically highly suspected diagnosis of covid-19, needed supplemental oxygen (up to 50% fraction of inspired oxygen), and were able to independently lie prone with verbal instruction. Of the 570 patients who were assessed for eligibility, 257 were randomised and 248 were included in the analysis.InterventionPatients were randomised 1:1 to prone positioning (that is, instructing a patient to lie on their stomach while they are in bed) or standard of care (that is, no instruction to adopt prone position).Main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was a composite of in-hospital death, mechanical ventilation, or worsening respiratory failure defined as needing at least 60% fraction of inspired oxygen for at least 24 hours. Secondary outcomes included the change in the ratio of oxygen saturation to fraction of inspired oxygen.ResultsThe trial was stopped early on the basis of futility for the pre-specified primary outcome. The median time from hospital admission until randomisation was 1 day, the median age of patients was 56 (interquartile range 45-65) years, 89 (36%) patients were female, and 222 (90%) were receiving oxygen via nasal prongs at the time of randomisation. The median time spent prone in the first 72 hours was 6 (1.5-12.8) hours in total for the prone arm compared with 0 (0-2) hours in the control arm. The risk of the primary outcome was similar between the prone group (18 (14%) events) and the standard care group (17 (14%) events) (odds ratio 0.92, 95% confidence interval 0.44 to 1.92). The change in the ratio of oxygen saturation to fraction of inspired oxygen after 72 hours was similar for patients randomised to prone positioning and standard of care.ConclusionAmong non-critically ill patients with hypoxaemia who were admitted to hospital with covid-19, a multifaceted intervention to increase prone positioning did not improve outcomes. However, wide confidence intervals preclude definitively ruling out benefit or harm. Adherence to prone positioning was poor, despite multiple efforts to increase it. Subsequent trials of prone positioning should aim to develop strategies to improve adherence to awake prone positioning.Study registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT04383613.
| S-EPMC8941343 | biostudies-literature