4.5 Article

Early Self-Proning in Awake, Non-intubated Patients in the Emergency Department: A Single ED's Experience During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Journal

ACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE
Volume 27, Issue 5, Pages 375-378

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/acem.13994

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective Prolonged and unaddressed hypoxia can lead to poor patient outcomes. Proning has become a standard treatment in the management of patients with ARDS who have difficulty achieving adequate oxygen saturation. The purpose of this study was to describe the use of early proning of awake, non-intubated patients in the emergency department (ED) during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods This pilot study was carried out in a single urban ED in New York City. We included patients suspected of having COVID-19 with hypoxia on arrival. A standard pulse oximeter was used to measure SpO(2). SpO(2) measurements were recorded at triage and after 5 minutes of proning. Supplemental oxygenation methods included non-rebreather mask (NRB) and nasal cannula. We also characterized post-proning failure rates of intubation within the first 24 hours of arrival to the ED. Results Fifty patients were included. Overall, the median SpO(2) at triage was 80% (IQR 69 to 85). After application of supplemental oxygen was given to patients on room air it was 84% (IQR 75 to 90). After 5 minutes of proning was added SpO(2) improved to 94% (IQR 90 to 95). Comparison of the pre- to post-median by the Wilcoxon Rank-sum test yielded P = 0.001. Thirteen patients (24%) failed to improve or maintain their oxygen saturations and required endotracheal intubation within 24 hours of arrival to the ED. Conclusion Awake early self-proning in the emergency department demonstrated improved oxygen saturation in our COVID-19 positive patients. Further studies are needed to support causality and determine the effect of proning on disease severity and mortality.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available