ArticleCureus2023
Short-Term Outcomes of the First-Session Prone Position in Patients With Severe Coronavirus Disease 2019: A Retrospective Chart Review.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Prone positioning during ventilation is recommended for patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, the efficacy of first-session prone positioning in improving short-term outcomes remains unclear. Therefore, we aimed to investigate the impact of the rate of change in partial pressure of oxygen/fraction of inspired oxygen (P/F) ratio before and after initial prone positioning on activities of daily living (ADL) and outcomes at discharge. Methods In this retrospective chart review, 22 patients with severe COVID-19 who required ventilator management between April and September 2021 were analyzed. Patients with an improvement in the P/F ratio (after initial prone positioning, compared to that before the session) by > 16mHg and < 16mmHg were defined as responders and non-responders, respectively. Results Compared with non-responders, responders had a significantly shorter ventilator duration, a higher Barthel Index at discharge, and a higher proportion of discharged patients. There was a significant between-group difference in chronic respiratory comorbidities, with one case (7.7%) among responders and six cases (66.7%) among non-responders. Conclusions This study is the first of its kind to investigate short-term outcomes in patients with COVID-19 requiring ventilator management after initial prone positioning. After initial prone positioning, responders had higher P/F ratios as well as improved ADLs and outcomes at discharge.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.