Cochrane · systematic review · CD003645

Positioning for acute respiratory distress in hospitalised infants and children

Bhandari, AP, Nnate, DA, Vasanthan, L, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2022 · Cochrane Library

Acute Respiratory InfectionsAMSTAR 2: not assessed
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
28
current version
GRADE rated
9
No studies
19
Included studies
NR
No studies 19 · 67.9%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 7 · 25%Low 2 · 7.1%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%

Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.

Questions and results

Summary of findings table ‐ Prone compared to supine for acute respiratory distress in hospitalised infants and children (ARDs)

Population: acute respiratory distress in hospitalised infants and children (ARDs)
7 questions
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Mortality (respiratory events) ‐ not reported
Summary of findings table ‐ Prone vs supine
no estimate extractedNRNo studies
Oxygen saturation (SaO2)
Summary of findings table ‐ Prone vs supine
no estimate extracted1 study · 30 participantsVery low
Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision
Blood gases (PO2)
Summary of findings table ‐ Prone vs supine
no estimate extracted1 study · 99 participantsLow
Downgraded: imprecision
PaCO2
Summary of findings table ‐ Prone vs supine
no estimate extracted1 study · 99 participantsLow
Downgraded: imprecision
Lung function (PaO2/FiO2 ratio)
Summary of findings table ‐ Prone vs supine
no estimate extracted2 studies · 121 participantsVery low
Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision
Oxygenation index (FiO2% X MPAW/PaO2)
Summary of findings table ‐ Prone vs supine
no estimate extracted2 studies · 121 participantsVery low
Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision
Potential adverse outcomes (extubation)
Summary of findings table ‐ Prone vs supine
OR 0.57 [0.13, 2.54]1 study · 102 participantsVery low
Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision

Summary of findings table ‐ Supine compared to good‐lung dependent for acute respiratory distress in hospitalised infants and children (ARDs)

Population: acute respiratory distress in hospitalised infants and children (ARDs)
7 questions
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Mortality (respiratory events) ‐ not reported
Summary of findings table ‐ Supine vs good‐lung dependent
no estimate extractedNRNo studies
Oxygen saturation (SaO2) ‐ not reported
Summary of findings table ‐ Supine vs good‐lung dependent
no estimate extractedNRNo studies
PaO2
Summary of findings table ‐ Supine vs good‐lung dependent
no estimate extracted1 study · 50 participantsVery low
Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision
Blood gases (PaCO2) ‐ not reported
Summary of findings table ‐ Supine vs good‐lung dependent
no estimate extractedNRNo studies
Lung function (PaO2/FiO2 ratio) ‐ not reported
Summary of findings table ‐ Supine vs good‐lung dependent
no estimate extractedNRNo studies
Oxygenation index (FiO2% X MPAW/PaO2) ‐ not reported
Summary of findings table ‐ Supine vs good‐lung dependent
no estimate extractedNRNo studies
Potential adverse outcomes (episodes of apnoea) ‐ not reported
Summary of findings table ‐ Supine vs good‐lung dependent
no estimate extractedNRNo studies

Summary of findings table ‐ Supine compared to good‐lung independent for acute respiratory distress in hospitalised infants and children

Population: acute respiratory distress in hospitalised infants and children
7 questions
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Mortality (respiratory events) ‐ not reported
Summary of findings table ‐ Supine vs good‐lung independent
no estimate extractedNRNo studies
Oxygen saturation (SaO2) ‐ not reported
Summary of findings table ‐ Supine vs good‐lung independent
no estimate extractedNRNo studies
PaO 2
Summary of findings table ‐ Supine vs good‐lung independent
no estimate extracted1 study · 50 participantsVery low
Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision
Blood gases (PCO2) ‐ not reported
Summary of findings table ‐ Supine vs good‐lung independent
no estimate extractedNRNo studies
Lung function (PaO2/FiO2 ratio) ‐ not reported
Summary of findings table ‐ Supine vs good‐lung independent
no estimate extractedNRNo studies
Oxygenation index (FiO2% X MPAW/PaO2) ‐ not reported
Summary of findings table ‐ Supine vs good‐lung independent
no estimate extractedNRNo studies
Potential adverse outcomes (episodes of apnoea) ‐ not reported
Summary of findings table ‐ Supine vs good‐lung independent
no estimate extractedNRNo studies

Summary of findings table ‐ Good‐lung independent compared to good‐lung dependent positioning for acute respiratory distress in hospitalised infants and children

Population: acute respiratory distress in hospitalised infants and children
7 questions
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Mortality (respiratory events) ‐ not reported
Summary of findings table ‐ Good‐lung independent vs good‐lung dependent positioning
no estimate extractedNRNo studies
Oxygen saturation (SaO2) ‐ not reported
Summary of findings table ‐ Good‐lung independent vs good‐lung dependent positioning
no estimate extractedNRNo studies
PaO 2 (cross‐over trial)
Summary of findings table ‐ Good‐lung independent vs good‐lung dependent positioning
no estimate extracted1 study · 50 participantsVery low
Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision
Blood gases (PaCO2) ‐ not reported
Summary of findings table ‐ Good‐lung independent vs good‐lung dependent positioning
no estimate extractedNRNo studies
Lung function (PaO2/FiO2 ratio) ‐ not reported
Summary of findings table ‐ Good‐lung independent vs good‐lung dependent positioning
no estimate extractedNRNo studies
Oxygenation index (FiO2% X MPAW/PaO2) ‐ not reported
Summary of findings table ‐ Good‐lung independent vs good‐lung dependent positioning
no estimate extractedNRNo studies
Potential adverse outcomes (episodes of apnoea) ‐ not reported
Summary of findings table ‐ Good‐lung independent vs good‐lung dependent positioning
no estimate extractedNRNo studies