 |
|
Effect of Prone Positioning on Clinical Outcomes in Children With Acute Lung Injury
A Randomized Controlled Trial
Martha A. Q. Curley, RN, PhD;
Patricia L. Hibberd, MD, PhD;
Lori D. Fineman, RN, MS;
David Wypij, PhD;
Mei-Chiung Shih, PhD;
John E. Thompson, RRT;
Mary Jo C. Grant, RN, PhD;
Frederick E. Barr, MD, MS;
Natalie Z. Cvijanovich, MD;
Lauren Sorce, RN, MS;
Peter M. Luckett, MD;
Michael A. Matthay, MD;
John H. Arnold, MD
JAMA. 2005;294:229-237.
Context In uncontrolled clinical studies, prone positioning appeared to be safe and to improve oxygenation in pediatric patients with acute lung injury. However, the effect of prone positioning on clinical outcomes in children is not known.
Objective To test the hypothesis that at the end of 28 days infants and children with acute lung injury treated with prone positioning would have more ventilator-free days than those treated with supine positioning.
Design, Setting, and Patients Multicenter, randomized, controlled clinical trial conducted from August 28, 2001, to April 23, 2004, of 102 pediatric patients from 7 US pediatric intensive care units aged 2 weeks to 18 years who were treated with supine vs prone positioning. Randomization was concealed and group assignment was not blinded.
Intervention Patients were randomized to either supine or prone positioning within 48 hours of meeting acute lung injury criteria, with those patients in the prone group being positioned within 4 hours of randomization and remaining prone for 20 hours each day during the acute phase of their illness for a maximum of 7 days, after which they were positioned supine. Both groups were treated using lung protective ventilator and sedation protocols, extubation readiness testing, and hemodynamic, nutrition, and skin care guidelines.
Main Outcome Measure Ventilator-free days to day 28.
Results The trial was stopped at the planned interim analysis on the basis of the prespecified futility stopping rule. There were no differences in the number of ventilator-free days between the 2 groups (mean [SD], 15.8 [8.5] supine vs 15.6 [8.6] prone; mean difference, –0.2 days; 95% CI, –3.6 to 3.2; P = .91). After controlling for age, Pediatric Risk of Mortality III score, direct vs indirect acute lung injury, and mode of mechanical ventilation at enrollment, the adjusted difference in ventilator-free days was 0.3 days (95% CI, –3.0 to 3.5; P = .87). There were no differences in the secondary end points, including proportion alive and ventilator-free on day 28 (P = .45), mortality from all causes (P>.99), the time to recovery of lung injury (P = .78), organ-failure–free days (P = .88), and cognitive impairment (P = .16) or overall functional health (P = .12) at hospital discharge or on day 28.
Conclusion Prone positioning does not significantly reduce ventilator-free days or improve other clinical outcomes in pediatric patients with acute lung injury.
Author Affiliations: Children’s Hospital Boston, Boston, Mass (Drs Curley, Wypij, Shih, and Arnold, and Mr Thompson); Tufts-New England Medical Center, Boston, Mass (Dr Hibberd); University of California, San Francisco (Dr Matthay and Ms Fineman); Primary Children’s Medical Center, Salt Lake City, Utah (Dr Grant); Vanderbilt Children’s Hospital, Nashville, Tenn (Dr Barr); Children’s Hospital Oakland, Oakland, Calif (Dr Cvijanovich); Children’s Memorial Hospital, Chicago, Ill (Ms Sorce); and Children’s Medical Center of Dallas, Dallas, Tex (Dr Luckett).
 CiteULike  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati  Twitter
What's this?
RELATED LETTERS
Prone Positioning in Children With Acute Lung Injury
Ricardo Garcia Branco and Pedro Celiny Ramos Garcia
JAMA. 2005;294(18):2297.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Prone Positioning in Children With Acute Lung Injury—Reply
Martha A. Q. Curley, Patricia L. Hibberd, Frederick E. Barr, Natalie Z. Cvijanovich, Michael A. Matthay, and John H. Arnold
JAMA. 2005;294(18):2297-2298.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
RELATED ARTICLE
Prone Positioning in Children With ARDS: Positive Reflections on a Negative Clinical Trial
Brian P. Kavanagh
JAMA. 2005;294(2):248-250.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES
|
Characteristics of Children Intubated and Mechanically Ventilated in 16 PICUs
Khemani et al.
Chest 2009;136:765-771.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Incidence and Outcomes of Pediatric Acute Lung Injury
Zimmerman et al.
Pediatrics 2009;124:87-95.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Comparison of the Pulse Oximetric Saturation/Fraction of Inspired Oxygen Ratio and the PaO2/Fraction of Inspired Oxygen Ratio in Children
Khemani et al.
Chest 2009;135:662-668.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Effect of Low-Dose Naloxone Infusion on Fentanyl Requirements in Critically Ill Children
Darnell et al.
Pediatrics 2008;121:e1363-e1371.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Effect of mechanical ventilation in the prone position on clinical outcomes in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Sud et al.
CMAJ 2008;178:1153-1161.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Ranieri et al.
Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med. 2007;176:520-520.
FULL TEXT
Prone Position in Early and Severe Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: A Design for a Definitive Randomized Controlled Trial
Mentzelopoulos et al.
Anesth. Analg. 2007;104:466-468.
FULL TEXT
Clinical Year in Review III: Critical Care, Mechanical Ventilation, Sleep Medicine, and Lung Cancer
Moss
Proc Am Thorac Soc 2006;3:645-649.
FULL TEXT
A Multicenter Trial of Prolonged Prone Ventilation in Severe Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome
Mancebo et al.
Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med. 2006;173:1233-1239.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Pharmacotherapy of Acute Lung Injury and the Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome
Cepkova and Matthay
J Intensive Care Med 2006;21:119-143.
ABSTRACT
Prone Positioning in Children With Acute Lung Injury
Branco and Garcia
JAMA 2005;294:2297-2297.
FULL TEXT
What's new in the other general journals
BMJ 2005;331:181-182.
FULL TEXT
Prone Positioning in Children With ARDS: Positive Reflections on a Negative Clinical Trial
Kavanagh
JAMA 2005;294:248-250.
FULL TEXT
|
