Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
http://localhost:8080/xmlui/handle/123456789/10695
Full metadata record
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | Yudhistira Tan, Julianus | - |
dc.contributor.author | Eliadora Togatorop, Via | - |
dc.contributor.author | Koerniawan, Dheni | - |
dc.contributor.author | Eli Kosasih, Cecep | - |
dc.contributor.author | Suzana Mediani, Henny | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2025-06-24T03:23:01Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2025-06-24T03:23:01Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2024 | - |
dc.identifier.uri | http://localhost:8080/xmlui/handle/123456789/10695 | - |
dc.description.abstract | Introduction: While numerous meta-analyses have explored the efficacy of awake prone position (APP), most have concentrated solely on intubation rate among Covid-19 patients without comprehensively identifying the influencing factors. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of APP along with its moderating factors on oxygenation, intubation rate, and mortality in non-intubated acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) patients. Methods: We conducted a systematic search in PubMed, Web of Science, and CINAHL from inception to December 2022. JBI critical appraisal tools were used to assess the study quality. Random-effects model was employed to calculate pooled standardized mean difference for continuous outcomes and risk ratio for dichotomous outcomes. Results: Among the 39 studies included, most patients were suffering from Covid-19, using conventional oxygen therapy, and receiving APP outside the ICU. APP significantly improved the PaO2/FiO2 ratio (SMD=0.70, 95% CI=0.51-0.88) and SpO2/FiO2 ratio (SMD=0.76, 95% CI=0.51-1.01), while also reducing the risk of intubation (RR=0.66, 95% CI=0.51-0.85) and mortality (RR=0.62, 95% CI=0.49-0.78). Factors including severity, respiratory device, body mass index, detail of position, use of medication assistance, total duration, follow-up time, position at follow-up, and study design significantly influence the effectiveness of APP. APP did not lead to significant improvements in length of stay and adverse events Conclusions: APP is a safe and beneficial intervention, enhancing oxygenation and reducing intubation and mortality rates in non-intubated ARDS patients. Importantly, various patient and intervention characteristics should be taken into account when implementing APP. Further well-designed experimental studies are needed to strengthen the evidence base. | en_US |
dc.subject | ARDS, awake prone positioning, intubation rate, length of stay, mortality, oxygenation | en_US |
dc.title | Effectiveness of prone position with its moderating factors in non-intubated acute respiratory distress syndrome patients: a meta-analysis | en_US |
dc.type | Article | en_US |
Appears in Collections: | VOL 19 NO 4 2024 |
Files in This Item:
File | Description | Size | Format | |
---|---|---|---|---|
document (7).pdf | 707.4 kB | Adobe PDF | View/Open |
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.