SynthesisFrontiers in nutrition2025
Effects of prone versus supine position during enteral nutrition on clinical outcomes and complications in mechanically ventilated patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in nutrition, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Enteral nutrition (EN) is routinely employed in mechanically ventilated patients, including those undergoing prone positioning for severe respiratory failure. However, the impact of body positioning during EN on clinical and nutritional outcomes remains unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effects of prone versus supine positioning during EN on caloric intake and related complications. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Embase, WanFang Data, CNKI, and SinoMed through June 16, 2025. Eligible studies included randomized controlled trials and cohort studies comparing EN outcomes between prone and supine positioning in adult mechanically ventilated patients. Data extraction, quality assessment (Newcastle-Ottawa Scale), and meta-analyses were performed in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Results: Five studies comprising 319 patients were included. Prone positioning was associated with significantly lower caloric intake (SMD = -1.31, 95% CI: -2.43 to -0.18), higher odds of vomiting (OR = 2.31, 95% CI: 1.63-3.26), high gastric residual volume (OR = 2.72, 95% CI: 1.47-5.03), ventilator-associated pneumonia (OR = 2.31, 95% CI: 1.34-3.99), and EN interruption (OR = 4.75, 95% CI: 2.22-10.17). No significant difference in mortality was observed (OR = 1.11, 95% CI: 0.65-1.88). No publication bias was detected. Conclusion: Compared to the supine position, EN during prone positioning is associated with reduced nutritional intake and increased gastrointestinal and pulmonary complications. Optimized feeding protocols are warranted to ensure safe and effective nutritional support in prone-ventilated patients.
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.