Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Effectiveness of bundle of care on tolerance of awake-prone positioning in patients with acute respiratory failure. A multicenter observational study
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Effectiveness of bundle of care on tolerance of awake-prone positioning in patients with acute respiratory failure. A multicenter observational study
Do you wish to request the book?
Effectiveness of bundle of care on tolerance of awake-prone positioning in patients with acute respiratory failure. A multicenter observational study
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Effectiveness of bundle of care on tolerance of awake-prone positioning in patients with acute respiratory failure. A multicenter observational study
2025
Overview
Purpose
This study aimed to assess the impact of a bundle of care strategy on the duration of awake prone positioning (AW-PP) and other key clinical outcomes in patients with acute respiratory failure (ARF) who require high-flow nasal oxygen (HFNO).
Methods
In this secondary analysis of a prospective, multicenter cohort study, we included patients admitted with COVID-19-related ARF who required HFNO. The protocol encouraged AW-PP for as long as possible. The main exposure was a bundle of care including light sedation, monitoring, and information to patients about the strategy (bundle) compared to no bundle (control). The primary outcome was the duration of AW-PP (hours/day), while secondary outcomes included endotracheal intubation and in-hospital mortality. Directed acyclic graphs (DAGs) were employed to identify variables related to both exposure and outcomes. Four models were used to evaluate exposure-outcome associations: inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW), “double-robust” approximation (DR), traditional regression (TR), and mixed-effects model (MEM).
Results
Out of 499 patients, 197 were exposed to bundle, and 302 did not. The exposure group had a median (IQR) AW-PP duration of 16 (10–18) hours/day, compared to 10 (7–14) hours/day in the control group. Regression coefficients (95% CI) were 3.39 (1.67–5.11), 3.35 (1.55–5.14), 3.95 (2.63–5.28), and 3.72 (2.5–4.94) for IPTW, DR, TR and MEM, respectively. The odds ratios (95% CI) for intubation were 0.34 (0.15–0.76), 0.23 (0.10–0.50), 0.42 (0.23–0.77), and 0.48 (0.16–0.49), and for in-hospital mortality were 0.38 (0.11–1.27), 0.43 (0.14–1.26), 0.47 (0.22–0.91), and 0.46 (0.12–1.43) in the respective models.
Conclusion
In the evaluated population of patients with COVID-19-related ARF, implementing a bundle-of-care strategy was associated with a longer AW-PP exposure and a reduced risk of endotracheal intubation.
Trial Registration Number
ClinicalTrials.gov. Identifier NCT05178212. Date of registration: January 5th, 2022. Study Type: Observational.
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg,Springer Nature B.V
Subject
/ COVID-19
/ Exposure
/ Female
/ Humans
/ Intubation, Intratracheal - statistics & numerical data
/ Male
/ Medicine
/ Original
/ Oxygen Inhalation Therapy - methods
/ Patient Care Bundles - methods
/ Patient Positioning - methods
/ Patients
/ Pneumology/Respiratory System
/ Respiratory Insufficiency - therapy
/ Strategy
