The PhLIP team: Feasibility of a physiotherapy-led intensive prone positioning team initiative during the COVID-19 pandemic

Acceptability of a physiotherapy-led intensive prone positioning service in intensive care: A qualitative study with multidisciplinary clinicians

BACKGROUND

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic resulted in an increased number of patients with COVID-19-related respiratory failure requiring prone positioning. To reduce pressure on nursing and medical staff in the intensive care unit (ICU), a physiotherapy-led intensive prone positioning (PhLIP) service was implemented.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to explore the acceptability of the PhLIP service from the perspective of nurses and doctors working in the ICU and the physiotherapists who delivered the service.

METHODS

A qualitative evaluation was conducted using semistructured interviews and focus groups, guided by the theoretical framework of acceptability (TFA). Participants included doctors, nurses, and physiotherapists who interacted with or delivered the PhLIP service.

RESULTS

A total of 19 interviews (eight doctors and 11 physiotherapists) and four focus groups (13 nurses) were conducted. Eleven themes were identified within the eight domains of the TFA. Overall, the PhLIP team was highly valued and appreciated (TFA: affective attitude); enabled high-quality care and improved ICU efficiency (TFA: perceived effectiveness); reduced risks to patients and staff (TFA: perceived safety and risk); and was empowering for the clinicians involved (TFA: self-efficacy). Being in the PhLIP team was physically and mentally exhausting, and the service put strain on the physiotherapy department due to reallocation of staff (TFA: burden). Having trust in the physiotherapists leading the prone positioning service was a key influence on nursing and medical acceptance of the service.

CONCLUSION

The PhLIP team delivered an acceptable service that improved clinical care and efficiency during the COVID-19 pandemic. Other ICUs should consider the availability, skills, and confidence in the team selected to implement an intensive prone positioning service, should the need arise again. Researchers using the TFA to explore acceptability of healthcare innovations should also consider the recipients' trust in those delivering the intervention.

Complications associated with prone positioning in mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients: A multicentre, retrospective observational study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Prone positioning is commonly applied to improve gas exchange in mechanically ventilated patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Whilst prone positioning is effective, specific complications may arise. We aimed to assess the prevalence of specific complications related to prone positioning in patients mechanically ventilated for COVID-19-related ARDS.

DESIGN

Multicentre, retrospective observational study.

METHODS

Multi-centre observational study of mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19-related ARDS admitted to intensive care units in Melbourne, Australia, from August to November 2021. Data on baseline characteristics, prone positioning, complications, and patient outcomes were collected.

RESULTS

We assessed 553 prone episodes in 220 patients across seven sites (mean ± standard deviation age: 54 ± 13 years, 61% male). Overall, 58% (127/220) of patients experienced at least one prone-positioning-related complication. Pressure injury was the most prevalent (n = 92/220, 42%) complication reported. Factors associated with increased risk of pressure injury were male sex (adjusted odds ratio = 1.15, 95% confidence interval: [1.02-1.31]) and the total number of prone episodes (adjusted odds ratio = 1.11, 95% confidence interval: [1.07-1.15]). Device dislodgement was the next most common complication, occurring in 28 of 220 (13%) patients. There were no nerve or retinal injuries reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Pressure injuries and line dislodgement were the most prevalent complications associated with prone positioning of patients mechanically ventilated for COVID-19. The risk of pressure injuries was associated with male sex and the number of prone positioning episodes.

Pressure injuries in mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients utilising different prone positioning techniques - A prospective observational study

OBJECTIVES

To compare the incidence and distribution of pressure injuries (PIs) with two approaches to prone positioning for mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients, and to determine the prevalence of these PIs on intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital discharge.

DESIGN

A prospective observational study.

SETTING

Adult patients admitted to a quaternary ICU with COVID-19-associated acute lung injury, between September 2021 and February 2022.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Incidence and anatomical distribution of PIs during ICU stay for "Face Down" and "Swimmers Position" as well as on ICU and hospital discharge.

RESULTS

We investigated 206 prone episodes in 63 patients. In the Face Down group, 26 of 34 patients (76 %) developed at least one PI, compared to 10 of 22 patients (45 %) in the Swimmers Position group (p = 0.02). Compared to the Swimmers Position group, the Face Down group developed more pressure injuries per patient (median 1 [1, 3] vs 0 [0, 2], p = 0.04) and had more facial PIs (p = 0.002). In a multivariate logistic regression model, patients were more likely to have at least one PI with Face Down position (OR 4.67, 95 % CI 1.28, 17.04, p = 0.02) and greater number of prone episodes (OR 1.75, 95 % CI 1.12, 2.74, p = 0.01). Over 80 % of all PIs were either stage 1 or stage 2. By ICU discharge, 29 % had healed and by hospital discharge, 73 % of all PIs had healed.

CONCLUSION

Swimmers Position had a significantly lower incidence of PIs compared to the Face Down approach. One-quarter of PIs had healed by time of ICU discharge and three-quarters by time of hospital discharge.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CLINICAL PRACTICE

There are differences in incidence of PIs related to prone positioning approaches. This study validates and helps better inform current prone position guidelines recommending the use of Swimmers Position. The low prevalence of PIs at hospital discharge is reassuring.

Magnitude and time to peak oxygenation effect of prone positioning in ventilated adults with COVID-19 related acute hypoxemic respiratory failure

BACKGROUND

Prone positioning may improve oxygenation in acute hypoxemic respiratory failure and was widely adopted in COVID-19 patients. However, the magnitude and timing of its peak oxygenation effect remain uncertain with the optimum dosage unknown. Therefore, we aimed to investigate the magnitude of the peak effect of prone positioning on the PaO2 :FiO2 ratio during prone and secondly, the time to peak oxygenation.

METHODS

Multi-centre, observational study of invasively ventilated adults with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure secondary to COVID-19 treated with prone positioning. Baseline characteristics, prone positioning and patient outcome data were collected. All arterial blood gas (ABG) data during supine, prone and after return to supine position were analysed. The magnitude of peak PaO2 :FiO2 ratio effect and time to peak PaO2 :FIO2 ratio effect was measured.

RESULTS

We studied 220 patients (mean age 54 years) and 548 prone episodes. Prone positioning was applied for a mean (±SD) 3 (±2) times and 16 (±3) hours per episode. Pre-proning PaO2 :FIO2 ratio was 137 (±49) for all prone episodes. During the first episode. the mean PaO2 :FIO2 ratio increased from 125 to a peak of 196 (p < .001). Peak effect was achieved during the first episode, after 9 (±5) hours in prone position and maintained until return to supine position.

CONCLUSIONS

In ventilated adults with COVID-19 acute hypoxemic respiratory failure, peak PaO2 :FIO2 ratio effect occurred during the first prone positioning episode and after 9 h. Subsequent episodes also improved oxygenation but with diminished effect on PaO2 :FIO2 ratio. This information can help guide the number and duration of prone positioning episodes.

Adverse events related to physiotherapy practice: a scoping review

Introduction

While adverse events related to physiotherapy are possible, the type of adverse event and the area of physiotherapy practice in which they occur are not well understood. The purpose of this scoping review was to establish adverse events related to physiotherapy practice and understand the nature of these events and the circumstances in which they occurred.

Methods

Relevant literature from January 2014 to February 2024 was gathered from five electronic databases. Studies reporting adverse events within any physiotherapy practice (intervention or assessment) were eligible. Two reviewers independently assessed title and abstract, and full texts. Findings were synthesised by clinical streams.

Results

A total of 58 studies met the inclusion criteria. Common adverse events described in musculoskeletal physiotherapy involving manual therapy, exercise and electrotherapy were increased pain and stiffness. Cardiorespiratory physiotherapy interventions involving early mobilisation, exercise and airway clearance therapy reported desaturation and haemodynamic instability. Neurological physiotherapy studies reported falls and fatigue during gait and balance training and exercise. Oncology and aged care interventions involving exercise, balance training and lymphoedema management reported increased pain and muscle strain while studies including pelvic floor muscle training reported the adverse event of vaginal discomfort.

Conclusion

This review identified adverse events occurring during physiotherapy interventions or assessment procedures. Increased monitoring and proactive safety measures may be necessary to ensure patient safety during these treatments.