Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41233869›Full record

ArticleTrials2025

A randomised crossover trial of staff time with proned patients in the ICU using the 'BathMat'.

Jerome Condry, Andy Georgiou, Anders Vangsgaard, Harry Mills, Theresa Smith, Alistair Hunt, Alexander J G Lunt

Registry-linked trialAbstract readClinical Trial Protocol
In one paragraph

Article in Trials, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06844617 (A Trial of the Difference in Staff Time Involved in Repositioning Proned Patients in the ICU Using the 'BathMat' Compared With Standard Care), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT06844617 nacompletednot on this map

A Trial of the Difference in Staff Time Involved in Repositioning Proned Patients in the ICU Using the 'BathMat' Compared With Standard Care

TypeinterventionalSponsorRoyal United Hospitals Bath NHS Foundation TrustRan2025 to 2026Enrolled30ConditionsAcute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS), Proning, Intensive Care MedicineArmsBathMat
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Jerome CondryRoyal United Hospitals Bath NHS Foundation Trust, Bath, BA1 3NG, UK.
Andy GeorgiouRoyal United Hospitals Bath NHS Foundation Trust, Bath, BA1 3NG, UK.
Anders VangsgaardUniversity of Bath, Claverton Down, Bath, BA2 7AY, UK.
Harry MillsUniversity of Bath, Claverton Down, Bath, BA2 7AY, UK.
Theresa SmithUniversity of Bath, Claverton Down, Bath, BA2 7AY, UK.
Alistair HuntUniversity of Bath, Claverton Down, Bath, BA2 7AY, UK.
Alexander J G LuntUniversity of Bath, Claverton Down, Bath, BA2 7AY, UK. ajgl20@bath.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3340-6413

Funding

Wellcome Trust 206410
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe technique of turning a ventilated patient into the prone position is one which has a strong evidence base for improving both oxygenation and patient survival in the intensive care unit (ICU). As such, proning is advocated in national and international guidance. To mitigate the risk of complications, national guidance recommends repositioning proned patients every 2-4 h. The current process of repositioning is associated with risk and requires multiple staff members recurrently during the period of prone therapy. There is therefore an urgent need to explore safer and more efficient techniques. To address these issues, a multi-vessel inflatable pillow (the 'BathMat') has been developed which aims to improve the safety and ease of repositioning, whilst reducing the number of staff and the time required. Inflation of the BathMat, which is placed beneath a proned patient, allows easy repositioning of the head and arms, before deflation returning the patient to the resting position. The device requires clinical testing to assess its benefits outside of simulated scenarios.

methodsThe BathMat trial is a randomised, multicentre, single-blind crossover study of repositioning in ventilated proned patients in ICU using the BathMat vs conventional care. Ventilated patients who require proning will be randomised to be repositioned with standard care or the BathMat. The same repositioning method will be used throughout each proning session, but will alternate on subsequent proning sessions between BathMat and standard care. The primary outcome is the difference in total staff time (number of staff × total time taken) required to reposition a patient with the BathMat compared with standard care. Secondary outcomes are the number of repositioning exercises performed, the number of adverse incidents associated with repositioning, the ease of manual handling, and the health economic costs of the complications of proning. DISCUSSION: This is the first clinical trial of a device specifically designed to improve the quality of patient care delivered and improve the staffing resources required to care for proned ICU patients. The impact potential for patients and staff is significant, through liberation of staff, improved manual handling, and risk mitigation for proned patients. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT06844617. Registered on Jan. 19, 2025. https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06844617.

Indexed as

Intensive Care UnitsPatient PositioningRespiration, ArtificialCross-Over StudiesEquipment DesignHumansMulticenter Studies as TopicProne PositionRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSingle-Blind MethodTime Factors

Identifiers

PMID41233869
PMCPMC12613557

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.