俯卧位治疗急性呼吸窘迫综合征的障碍、促进因素和趋势。

Thomas F. Bodley MD, MSc , Dominique Piquette MD, PhD , Kaveh G. Shojania MD , Ruxandra Pinto PhD , Damon C. Scales MD, PhD , Andre C.K.B. Amaral MD
{"title":"俯卧位治疗急性呼吸窘迫综合征的障碍、促进因素和趋势。","authors":"Thomas F. Bodley MD, MSc ,&nbsp;Dominique Piquette MD, PhD ,&nbsp;Kaveh G. Shojania MD ,&nbsp;Ruxandra Pinto PhD ,&nbsp;Damon C. Scales MD, PhD ,&nbsp;Andre C.K.B. Amaral MD","doi":"10.1016/j.chstcc.2024.100059","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Prone positioning is a historically underused evidence-based practice for ARDS. Despite increased prone positioning during the COVID-19 pandemic, some patients may remain at risk of nonuse.</p></div><div><h3>Research Question</h3><p>What is the current evidence-based gap for prone positioning in ARDS, how is use changing over time, and what are patient-level barriers and facilitators to prone positioning?</p></div><div><h3>Study Design and Methods</h3><p>This retrospective cohort included invasively ventilated adults with ARDS and who met prone positioning criteria from six hospitals. The rate of prone positioning among eligible patients was summarized from January 2018 through December 2021. Segmented Poisson regression was used to describe temporal trends. Logistic regression was used to identify patient-level barriers and facilitators to prone positioning.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Seven hundred ninety-nine patients fulfilled criteria for prone positioning. The mean age was 57 years, 125 patients (15.6%) had COVID-19, mean ICU stay was 19.5 days, and the mortality rate was 50.1%. Prone positioning was used in 297 of 799 patients (37.2%). Prone positioning was increasing before the pandemic with a relative rate (RR) of 1.12 per quarter (95% CI, 1.03-1.22). Prone positioning increased during the pandemic vs before the pandemic (RR, 1.62; 95% CI, 1.02-2.61), but not for patients with nonrespiratory diagnoses causing ARDS (RR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.22-2.52). Barriers to prone positioning included vasopressor use (OR for withholding prone positioning, 1.15 per 0.1 μm/kg/min norepinephrine equivalent; 95% CI, 1.06-1.26), age (OR, 1.12 per 5 years; 95% CI, 1.03-1.22), and having undergone surgery (OR, 2.41; 95% CI, 1.00-5.81). Facilitators included having COVID-19 (OR for withholding prone positioning, 0.10; 95% CI, 0.04-0.24) or another respiratory illness (OR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.23-0.79), and receiving neuromuscular blockade (OR, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.13-0.38).</p></div><div><h3>Interpretation</h3><p>Despite increased prone positioning during the COVID-19 pandemic, an evidence-based gap persists, especially for patients with nonrespiratory causes of ARDS. Multiple barriers and facilitators must be targeted to increase prone positioning.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":93934,"journal":{"name":"CHEST critical care","volume":"2 2","pages":"Article 100059"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949788424000133/pdfft?md5=76fd29a6380dd3123a2b912a03a6f74c&pid=1-s2.0-S2949788424000133-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Barriers, Facilitators, and Trends in Prone Positioning for ARDS\",\"authors\":\"Thomas F. Bodley MD, MSc ,&nbsp;Dominique Piquette MD, PhD ,&nbsp;Kaveh G. Shojania MD ,&nbsp;Ruxandra Pinto PhD ,&nbsp;Damon C. Scales MD, PhD ,&nbsp;Andre C.K.B. Amaral MD\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.chstcc.2024.100059\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Prone positioning is a historically underused evidence-based practice for ARDS. Despite increased prone positioning during the COVID-19 pandemic, some patients may remain at risk of nonuse.</p></div><div><h3>Research Question</h3><p>What is the current evidence-based gap for prone positioning in ARDS, how is use changing over time, and what are patient-level barriers and facilitators to prone positioning?</p></div><div><h3>Study Design and Methods</h3><p>This retrospective cohort included invasively ventilated adults with ARDS and who met prone positioning criteria from six hospitals. The rate of prone positioning among eligible patients was summarized from January 2018 through December 2021. Segmented Poisson regression was used to describe temporal trends. Logistic regression was used to identify patient-level barriers and facilitators to prone positioning.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Seven hundred ninety-nine patients fulfilled criteria for prone positioning. The mean age was 57 years, 125 patients (15.6%) had COVID-19, mean ICU stay was 19.5 days, and the mortality rate was 50.1%. Prone positioning was used in 297 of 799 patients (37.2%). Prone positioning was increasing before the pandemic with a relative rate (RR) of 1.12 per quarter (95% CI, 1.03-1.22). Prone positioning increased during the pandemic vs before the pandemic (RR, 1.62; 95% CI, 1.02-2.61), but not for patients with nonrespiratory diagnoses causing ARDS (RR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.22-2.52). Barriers to prone positioning included vasopressor use (OR for withholding prone positioning, 1.15 per 0.1 μm/kg/min norepinephrine equivalent; 95% CI, 1.06-1.26), age (OR, 1.12 per 5 years; 95% CI, 1.03-1.22), and having undergone surgery (OR, 2.41; 95% CI, 1.00-5.81). Facilitators included having COVID-19 (OR for withholding prone positioning, 0.10; 95% CI, 0.04-0.24) or another respiratory illness (OR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.23-0.79), and receiving neuromuscular blockade (OR, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.13-0.38).</p></div><div><h3>Interpretation</h3><p>Despite increased prone positioning during the COVID-19 pandemic, an evidence-based gap persists, especially for patients with nonrespiratory causes of ARDS. Multiple barriers and facilitators must be targeted to increase prone positioning.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":93934,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"CHEST critical care\",\"volume\":\"2 2\",\"pages\":\"Article 100059\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949788424000133/pdfft?md5=76fd29a6380dd3123a2b912a03a6f74c&pid=1-s2.0-S2949788424000133-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"CHEST critical care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949788424000133\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CHEST critical care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949788424000133","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

研究背景俯卧位是一种历来未被充分使用的循证治疗 ARDS 的方法。尽管在 COVID-19 大流行期间增加了俯卧位,但一些患者可能仍有不使用的风险。研究问题目前 ARDS 中俯卧位的循证差距是什么,随着时间的推移使用情况如何变化,俯卧位在患者层面的障碍和促进因素是什么?研究设计和方法该回顾性队列纳入了六家医院符合俯卧位标准的有创通气成人 ARDS 患者。总结了 2018 年 1 月至 2021 年 12 月期间符合条件的患者的俯卧位率。分段泊松回归用于描述时间趋势。逻辑回归用于识别患者层面的俯卧位障碍和促进因素。结果79名患者符合俯卧位标准。平均年龄为 57 岁,125 名患者(15.6%)患有 COVID-19,ICU 平均住院天数为 19.5 天,死亡率为 50.1%。799 名患者中有 297 名(37.2%)采用了俯卧位。在大流行之前,俯卧位的使用率越来越高,相对比率 (RR) 为每季度 1.12(95% CI,1.03-1.22)。大流行期间与大流行前相比,俯卧位增加了(RR,1.62;95% CI,1.02-2.61),但非呼吸道诊断导致 ARDS 的患者的俯卧位没有增加(RR,0.74;95% CI,0.22-2.52)。俯卧位的障碍包括使用血管加压素(每 0.1 μm/kg/min 去甲肾上腺素当量中,1.15 为暂停俯卧位的 OR;95% CI,1.06-1.26)、年龄(每 5 年中,1.12 为暂停俯卧位的 OR;95% CI,1.03-1.22)和接受过手术(OR,2.41;95% CI,1.00-5.81)。促进因素包括患有 COVID-19(暂停俯卧位的 OR,0.10;95% CI,0.04-0.24)或其他呼吸道疾病(OR,0.42;95% CI,0.23-0.79),以及接受神经肌肉阻滞(OR,0.22;95% CI,0.13-0.38)。必须针对多种障碍和促进因素增加俯卧位。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Barriers, Facilitators, and Trends in Prone Positioning for ARDS

Background

Prone positioning is a historically underused evidence-based practice for ARDS. Despite increased prone positioning during the COVID-19 pandemic, some patients may remain at risk of nonuse.

Research Question

What is the current evidence-based gap for prone positioning in ARDS, how is use changing over time, and what are patient-level barriers and facilitators to prone positioning?

Study Design and Methods

This retrospective cohort included invasively ventilated adults with ARDS and who met prone positioning criteria from six hospitals. The rate of prone positioning among eligible patients was summarized from January 2018 through December 2021. Segmented Poisson regression was used to describe temporal trends. Logistic regression was used to identify patient-level barriers and facilitators to prone positioning.

Results

Seven hundred ninety-nine patients fulfilled criteria for prone positioning. The mean age was 57 years, 125 patients (15.6%) had COVID-19, mean ICU stay was 19.5 days, and the mortality rate was 50.1%. Prone positioning was used in 297 of 799 patients (37.2%). Prone positioning was increasing before the pandemic with a relative rate (RR) of 1.12 per quarter (95% CI, 1.03-1.22). Prone positioning increased during the pandemic vs before the pandemic (RR, 1.62; 95% CI, 1.02-2.61), but not for patients with nonrespiratory diagnoses causing ARDS (RR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.22-2.52). Barriers to prone positioning included vasopressor use (OR for withholding prone positioning, 1.15 per 0.1 μm/kg/min norepinephrine equivalent; 95% CI, 1.06-1.26), age (OR, 1.12 per 5 years; 95% CI, 1.03-1.22), and having undergone surgery (OR, 2.41; 95% CI, 1.00-5.81). Facilitators included having COVID-19 (OR for withholding prone positioning, 0.10; 95% CI, 0.04-0.24) or another respiratory illness (OR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.23-0.79), and receiving neuromuscular blockade (OR, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.13-0.38).

Interpretation

Despite increased prone positioning during the COVID-19 pandemic, an evidence-based gap persists, especially for patients with nonrespiratory causes of ARDS. Multiple barriers and facilitators must be targeted to increase prone positioning.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CHEST critical care
CHEST critical care Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine, Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Innovation and Adaptation in COVID-19 Pandemic Posthospital Discharge Contact and Monitoring in the United States Analytical Accuracy of a Continuous Glucose Monitor in Adult Diabetic Ketoacidosis Silent Burdens Prevalence of Inpatient Pulse Oximetry in Operative and Nonoperative Settings Operationalizing the New Global Definition of ARDS
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1