Physiological effects and subjective tolerability of prone positioning in COVID-19 and healthy hypoxic challenge

BACKGROUND: Prone positioning has a beneficial role in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients receiving ventilation but lacks evidence in awake non-ventilated patients, with most studies being retrospective, lacking control populations and information on subjective tolerability. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, single-centre study of prone positioning in awake non-ventilated patients with COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 pneumonia. The primary outcome was change in peripheral oxygenation in prone versus supine position. Secondary outcomes assessed effects on end-tidal CO(2), respiratory rate, heart rate and subjective symptoms. We also recruited healthy volunteers to undergo proning during hypoxic challenge. RESULTS: 238 hospitalised patients with pneumonia were screened; 55 were eligible with 25 COVID-19 patients and three non-COVID-19 patients agreeing to undergo proning – the latter insufficient for further analysis. 10 healthy control volunteers underwent hypoxic challenge. Patients with COVID-19 had a median age of 64 years (interquartile range 53–75). Proning led to an increase in oxygen saturation measured by pulse oximetry (SpO(2)) compared to supine position (difference +1.62%; p=0.003) and occurred within 10 min of proning. There were no effects on end-tidal CO(2), respiratory rate or heart rate. There was an increase in subjective discomfort (p=0.003), with no difference in breathlessness. Among healthy controls undergoing hypoxic challenge, proning did not lead to a change in SpO(2) or subjective symptom scores. CONCLUSION: Identification of suitable patients with COVID-19 requiring oxygen supplementation from general ward environments for awake proning is challenging. Prone positioning leads to a small increase in SpO(2) within 10 min of proning though is associated with increased discomfort.