Back

Prone Positioning in a North American Cohort of Hypoxemic Patients on Mechanical Ventilation

Barker, A. K.; Nishimura, A.; Nuppnau, M.; Buell, K. G.; Lyons, P. G.; Liao, W.-T.; Park-Egan, B.; Schmid, B. E.; Ingraham, N. E.; Chaudhari, V.; Gao, C. A.; Ortiz, A. C.; Weissman, G. E.; Chhikara, K.; Rojas, J. C.; Amaral, A. C.; Parker, W. F.; Iwashyna, T. J.; Hager, D. N.; Sjoding, M. W.; Hochberg, C. H.; CLIF Consortium,

2025-09-05 intensive care and critical care medicine
10.1101/2025.09.03.25334942 medRxiv
Show abstract

ObjectiveUse of prone positioning increased among mechanically ventilated patients during the COVID-19 pandemic, but it is unknown whether implementation of this life-saving intervention was sustained. Thus, we aimed to evaluate peri-pandemic trends in proning use. DesignWe conducted a retrospective cohort study of proning use among mechanically ventilated adults, with proning rates compared across pre-pandemic (1/2018-2/2020), pandemic (3/2020-2/2022), and post-pandemic (3/2022-12/2024) periods. Setting37 North American hospitals PatientsMechanically ventilated patients with persistent moderate-to-severe hypoxemia (PaO2/FiO2 [≤]150 mmHg, FiO2 [≥]0.6, and positive end-expiratory pressure [≥]5 cmH2O). InterventionProning within 12 hours of meeting study hypoxemia criteria. Measurements and Main ResultsAmong 5,760 proning-eligible patients, 1,737 (30.2%) received proning: 8.0% pre-pandemic, 44.6% pandemic, and 19.9% post-pandemic. The adjusted odds ratio (OR) for proning during pandemic versus pre-pandemic periods was 8.25 (95% Confidence Interval (CI): 6.35-10.70) and pandemic versus post-pandemic, 2.76 (95% CI: 1.83-4.17). Proning varied widely by hospital and was quantified with the median odds ratio (median change in odds of proning an identical patient admitted at a lower versus higher proning hospital) of 2.54 (95% Credible Interval (CrI): 1.75-4.58) pre-pandemic, 2.33 (95% CrI: 1.92-3.04) pandemic, and 2.58 (95% CrI: 1.99-3.73) post-pandemic. Pandemic-period patients with SARS-CoV2 were proned more than those without (OR: 4.55, [95% CI: 3.85-5.56]), but pandemic-period patients without SARS-CoV2 were still proned more than pre-pandemic (OR: 3.87, [95% CI: 2.92-5.13]) or post-pandemic patients (OR: 1.37, [95% CI: 1.03-1.83]). ConclusionsIn a North American cohort of proning-eligible patients, proning increased during the pandemic and then declined. Interventions that improve implementation of this life-saving treatment are urgently needed.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
BMJ
49 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
15.0%
2
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 12%
15.0%
3
Journal of General Internal Medicine
20 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
10.7%
4
JAMA Network Open
127 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
7.3%
5
The Lancet
16 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
7.0%
50% of probability mass above
6
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 3%
6.5%
7
Critical Care Explorations
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.5%
8
British Journal of Anaesthesia
14 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
4.0%
9
EClinicalMedicine
21 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.1%
10
eBioMedicine
130 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.7%
11
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 57%
1.7%
12
Critical Care
14 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.4%
13
Clinical Microbiology and Infection
60 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.4%
14
The Lancet Healthy Longevity
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.0%
15
The Lancet Digital Health
25 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.9%
16
European Respiratory Journal
54 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
17
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.8%
18
Journal of Medical Internet Research
85 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
19
PLOS Medicine
98 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.7%
20
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 63%
0.7%
21
BMC Public Health
147 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.7%
22
BMC Infectious Diseases
118 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.7%
23
Journal of Internal Medicine
12 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.7%
24
The Journal of Infectious Diseases
182 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.5%
25
The Lancet Respiratory Medicine
17 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.5%
26
New England Journal of Medicine
50 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
0.5%
27
Thorax
32 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
0.5%