COVID-19
Conditions
Brief summary
This study aims to determine if provider-recommended guidance on supine (on back) vs. prone (on stomach) positioning of patients testing positive for COVID-19 requiring supplemental oxygen, but not yet mechanically ventilated, improves outcomes in the inpatient setting. This study will be performed as a pragmatic clinical trial.
Detailed description
Disease Progression and Timing of Intervention The intervention described herein focuses on adjustment of patient positioning aimed at improving gas exchange and lung function in patients harboring COVID-19. This intervention will target the inpatient setting generally. Scientific/Clinical Rationale for Approach Since emergence of the novel coronavirus, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) now designated coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), one in six affected patients becomes seriously ill. The lung appears to be the most susceptible target organ, with a large swath of symptomatic patients struggling with mild upper respiratory tract illness and severe viral pneumonia resulting in respiratory failure. This respiratory failure is often fatal, with one study showing 28% non-survivors having experienced respiratory failure. Moreover, 81-97% of patients requiring mechanical ventilation do not survive. Like its interaction with Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS-CoV), angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) is the functional receptor for COVID-19. Viral adherence to host-cell membrane associated ACE2 facilitates the proximity required for viral spike mediated genetic material injection. In COVID-19, this spike is 10-20 times more likely to bind ACE2 than SARS. ACE2 is expressed in 0.64% of all human lung cells, with 83% of those cells being alveolar epithelial type II. In addition, gene ontology enrichment analysis showed that the ACE2-expressing alveolar epithelial type II have high levels of multiple viral process-related genes, including regulatory genes for viral processes, viral life cycle, viral assembly, and viral genome replication, suggesting that the ACE2-expressing alveolar epithelial type II cells facilitate coronaviral replication in the lung. Thus, these cells likely serve as a ready reservoir for viral invasion. Perhaps more importantly, alveolar type II cells function to generate and recycle surfactant essential to respiratory activity. Surfactant defends against alveolar collapse at low lung volume and protects the lung from injuries/infections caused by inhaled particles and micro-organisms. In COVID-19, if these vital cells are being destroyed, alveolar failure may ensue with severe lung impairment. Thus, interventions that are aimed at improving pressure normalization and alveolar protection may be beneficial in these patients. Prone positioning (PP) has long been used to combat hypoxemia in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Improvements in gas exchange result from improved alveolar ventilation and blood flow redistribution with enhanced perfusion following. PP reduces lung over inflation and bolsters alveolar recruitment. PP also promotes uniformity of vertical pleural pressure gradients resulting in more uniform alveolar size. Considering these physiologic factors together, the investigators hypothesize PP serves to balance stress and strain within the lungs of non-critically ill patients with COVID-19 leading to improved outcomes compared to traditional supine positioning. Prior Research Supporting the Positioning Model: Multiple studies have been conducted that support the use of PP as a proactive treatment to combat hypoxemia in ARDS. Each year, approximately 170,000 people are diagnosed with ARDS, and those diagnosed face mortality rates between 25% and 40%. The use of PP stretches back to the 1970s, as providers began to search for ways to ameliorate ARDS symptomatology and reduce the then even higher levels of mortality associated with it. Following initial reports that PP significantly improved oxygenation in 70-80% of patients with ARDS, it was adopted as a standard treatment option. Initially, randomized clinical trials struggled to replicate these findings, citing multiple limitations to study enrollment and treatment standardization that made ascertaining conclusive results difficult. Only as RCT construction has been refined to accommodate for these limitations have the benefits of PP been more clearly demonstrated. These beneficial effects have been recently upheld by the landmark PROSEVA study, a multicenter, prospective, randomized, controlled trial, that randomly assigned 466 patients with severe ARDS to undergo prone-positioning sessions of at least 16 hours or to be left in the supine position. Their results demonstrated a significant improvement in both 28- and 90-day mortality rates: the 28-day mortality was 16.0% in the prone group and 32.8% in the supine group (P\<0.001). The hazard ratio for death with prone positioning was 0.39 (95% confidence interval \[CI\], 0.25 to 0.63). Unadjusted 90-day mortality was 23.6% in the prone group versus 41.0% in the supine group (P\<0.001), with a hazard ratio of 0.44 (95% CI, 0.29 to 0.67). Per these positive findings, PP has been consistently shown to be an effective mechanism to increase oxygenation in patients with ARDS when implemented under the following conditions: early enlisting of treatment and its consistent maintenance for at least 16 hours per day, and with concurrent use of lung-protective therapies. Translating these findings towards treatment of COVID-19 positive patients seems promising given the similarity of manifested symptoms and complications.
Interventions
Provider-recommended guidance on prone positioning of patients
No provider-recommendation, patients will remain in their natural choice of position
Sponsors
Study design
Masking description
Patients and providers will necessarily be unblinded, but outcomes will be analyzed by a blind assessor.
Intervention model description
This study will be performed as a pragmatic controlled clinical trial with parallel group assignment.
Eligibility
Inclusion criteria
* This study will enroll all patients admitted to VUMC who test positive for COVID-19 and require supplemental oxygen, but are not yet mechanically ventilated.
Exclusion criteria
* Patients admitted on mechanical ventilation will be excluded from enrollment.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Number of Participants Categorized on the Modified WHO Ordinal Scale by the Highest Level of Support on Day 5 | 5 days post-randomization | The highest level of support on the 5th day after enrollment according to the following scale adjusted for patient status at enrollment according to the same scale and ranked by mean FIO2 within each category, as appropriate. * Death * ECMO * Mechanical ventilation (ranked by mean FIO2) * Non-invasive ventilation such as BiPAP (ranked by mean FIO2) * High flow nasal cannula, e.g. Optiflow, Vapotherm or other similar device (titrated by FiO2%) (ranked by mean FIO2) * Standard nasal cannula (titrated by L/min up to 15 L/min) or face mask (ranked by mean FIO2) * Room air |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| FIO2 | First 5 days post-randomization | For each day, the investigators will record the most intensive oxygen delivery mode and then, for that highest level of oxygen support device, the max FiO2 while exposed to that device. |
Countries
United States
Participant flow
Participants by arm
| Arm | Count |
|---|---|
| Usual Care Participants randomized to this arm will remain in their natural choice of position, which is anticipated to favor a supine, semi-recumbent position.
Usual Care: No provider-recommendation, patients will remain in their natural choice of position | 243 |
| Prone Participants randomized to this arm will be encouraged to lay in a completely prone position for as much time as is tolerable during hospitalization.
Prone: Provider-recommended guidance on prone positioning of patients | 258 |
| Total | 501 |
Baseline characteristics
| Characteristic | Total | Prone | Usual Care |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age, Continuous | 61.0 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 15.3 | 61.6 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 15.4 | 60.3 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 15.2 |
| Race/Ethnicity, Customized Ethnicity Hispanic/Latinx | 66 Participants | 33 Participants | 33 Participants |
| Race/Ethnicity, Customized Ethnicity Non-Hispanic/Latinx | 417 Participants | 213 Participants | 204 Participants |
| Race/Ethnicity, Customized Ethnicity Unknown ethnicity | 18 Participants | 12 Participants | 6 Participants |
| Race/Ethnicity, Customized Race American Indian or Alaska Native | 1 Participants | 1 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Race/Ethnicity, Customized Race Asian | 14 Participants | 8 Participants | 6 Participants |
| Race/Ethnicity, Customized Race Black or African American | 99 Participants | 56 Participants | 43 Participants |
| Race/Ethnicity, Customized Race Other race | 56 Participants | 30 Participants | 26 Participants |
| Race/Ethnicity, Customized Race Unknown race | 15 Participants | 9 Participants | 6 Participants |
| Race/Ethnicity, Customized Race White | 316 Participants | 154 Participants | 162 Participants |
| Region of Enrollment United States | 501 participants | 258 participants | 243 participants |
| Sex: Female, Male Female | 217 Participants | 112 Participants | 105 Participants |
| Sex: Female, Male Male | 284 Participants | 146 Participants | 138 Participants |
Adverse events
| Event type | EG000 affected / at risk | EG001 affected / at risk |
|---|---|---|
| deaths Total, all-cause mortality | 48 / 243 | 63 / 258 |
| other Total, other adverse events | 0 / 243 | 0 / 258 |
| serious Total, serious adverse events | 0 / 243 | 0 / 258 |
Outcome results
Number of Participants Categorized on the Modified WHO Ordinal Scale by the Highest Level of Support on Day 5
The highest level of support on the 5th day after enrollment according to the following scale adjusted for patient status at enrollment according to the same scale and ranked by mean FIO2 within each category, as appropriate. * Death * ECMO * Mechanical ventilation (ranked by mean FIO2) * Non-invasive ventilation such as BiPAP (ranked by mean FIO2) * High flow nasal cannula, e.g. Optiflow, Vapotherm or other similar device (titrated by FiO2%) (ranked by mean FIO2) * Standard nasal cannula (titrated by L/min up to 15 L/min) or face mask (ranked by mean FIO2) * Room air
Time frame: 5 days post-randomization
| Arm | Measure | Category | Value (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Usual Care | Number of Participants Categorized on the Modified WHO Ordinal Scale by the Highest Level of Support on Day 5 | Discharged | 109 Participants |
| Usual Care | Number of Participants Categorized on the Modified WHO Ordinal Scale by the Highest Level of Support on Day 5 | Room Air | 15 Participants |
| Usual Care | Number of Participants Categorized on the Modified WHO Ordinal Scale by the Highest Level of Support on Day 5 | Standard Nasal Cannula | 57 Participants |
| Usual Care | Number of Participants Categorized on the Modified WHO Ordinal Scale by the Highest Level of Support on Day 5 | High Flow Nasal Cannula | 16 Participants |
| Usual Care | Number of Participants Categorized on the Modified WHO Ordinal Scale by the Highest Level of Support on Day 5 | Non-invasive Ventilation | 26 Participants |
| Usual Care | Number of Participants Categorized on the Modified WHO Ordinal Scale by the Highest Level of Support on Day 5 | Mechanical Ventilation | 10 Participants |
| Usual Care | Number of Participants Categorized on the Modified WHO Ordinal Scale by the Highest Level of Support on Day 5 | ECMO | 1 Participants |
| Usual Care | Number of Participants Categorized on the Modified WHO Ordinal Scale by the Highest Level of Support on Day 5 | Death | 9 Participants |
| Prone | Number of Participants Categorized on the Modified WHO Ordinal Scale by the Highest Level of Support on Day 5 | Death | 19 Participants |
| Prone | Number of Participants Categorized on the Modified WHO Ordinal Scale by the Highest Level of Support on Day 5 | Discharged | 99 Participants |
| Prone | Number of Participants Categorized on the Modified WHO Ordinal Scale by the Highest Level of Support on Day 5 | Non-invasive Ventilation | 24 Participants |
| Prone | Number of Participants Categorized on the Modified WHO Ordinal Scale by the Highest Level of Support on Day 5 | Room Air | 15 Participants |
| Prone | Number of Participants Categorized on the Modified WHO Ordinal Scale by the Highest Level of Support on Day 5 | ECMO | 1 Participants |
| Prone | Number of Participants Categorized on the Modified WHO Ordinal Scale by the Highest Level of Support on Day 5 | Standard Nasal Cannula | 65 Participants |
| Prone | Number of Participants Categorized on the Modified WHO Ordinal Scale by the Highest Level of Support on Day 5 | Mechanical Ventilation | 19 Participants |
| Prone | Number of Participants Categorized on the Modified WHO Ordinal Scale by the Highest Level of Support on Day 5 | High Flow Nasal Cannula | 16 Participants |
FIO2
For each day, the investigators will record the most intensive oxygen delivery mode and then, for that highest level of oxygen support device, the max FiO2 while exposed to that device.
Time frame: First 5 days post-randomization
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Usual Care | FIO2 | Day 2 | 40.3 percentage of inspired oxygen | Standard Deviation 28.2 |
| Usual Care | FIO2 | Day 4 | 37.8 percentage of inspired oxygen | Standard Deviation 30.2 |
| Usual Care | FIO2 | Day 3 | 39.3 percentage of inspired oxygen | Standard Deviation 29.8 |
| Usual Care | FIO2 | Day 5 | 37.1 percentage of inspired oxygen | Standard Deviation 31 |
| Usual Care | FIO2 | Day 1 | 40.4 percentage of inspired oxygen | Standard Deviation 27.1 |
| Prone | FIO2 | Day 5 | 40.6 percentage of inspired oxygen | Standard Deviation 32 |
| Prone | FIO2 | Day 1 | 45.3 percentage of inspired oxygen | Standard Deviation 29.1 |
| Prone | FIO2 | Day 2 | 44.0 percentage of inspired oxygen | Standard Deviation 30.9 |
| Prone | FIO2 | Day 3 | 43.6 percentage of inspired oxygen | Standard Deviation 32.1 |
| Prone | FIO2 | Day 4 | 42.7 percentage of inspired oxygen | Standard Deviation 32.5 |