Hospital-Acquired Pressure Injuries in Adults With Prone Positioning Using Manual Method Versus Specialty Bed: A Retrospective Comparison Cohort Study.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the incidence of hospital-acquired pressure injuries (HAPIs) in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and placed in a prone position manually or using a specialty bed designed to facilitate prone positioning. A secondary aim was to compare mortality rates between these groups. DESIGN: Retrospective review of electronic medical records. SUBJECTS AND SETTING: The sample comprised 160 patients with ARDS managed by prone positioning. Their mean age was 61.08 years (SD = 12.73); 58% (n = 96) were male. The study setting was a 355-bed community hospital in the Western United States (Stockton, California). Data were collected from July 2019 to January 2021. METHODS: Data from electronic medical records were retrospectively searched for the development of pressure injuries, mortality, hospital length of stay, oxygenation status when placed in a prone position, and the presence of a COVID-19 infection. RESULTS: A majority of patients with ARDS were manually placed in a prone position (n = 106; 64.2%), and 54 of these patients (50.1%) were placed using a specialty care bed. Slightly more than half (n = 81; 50.1%) developed HAPIs. Chi-square analyses showed no association with the incidence of HAPIs using manual prone positioning versus the specialty bed (P = .9567). Analysis found no difference in HAPI occurrences between those with COVID-19 and patients without a coronavirus infection (P = .8462). Deep-tissue pressure injuries were the most common type of pressure injury. More patients (n = 85; 80.19%) who were manually placed in a prone position died compared to 58.18% of patients (n = 32) positioned using the specialty bed (P = .003). CONCLUSIONS: No differences in HAPI rates were found when placing patients manually in a prone position versus positioning using a specialty bed designed for this purpose.

Midodrine to optimize heart failure therapy in patients with concurrent hypotension.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention statistics, about 6.2 million adults in the United States have heart failure. Guideline-Directed Medical Therapy (GDMT) involving the use of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors with or without a neprilysin inhibitor, ß-blockers, mineralocorticoid-receptor-antagonists, and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors serve as the backbone for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) therapy. However, in patients with refractory hypotension, the initiation of GDMT may not be possible. We present four cases where the use of midodrine, an alpha adrenergic agonist, serves as bridge therapy for the initiation or continuation of GDMT with marked clinical improvement. These cases illustrate how exacerbations of HFrEF may be ameliorated with outpatient midodrine titration among patients with baseline, persistent hypotension such that GDMT may be better tolerated.