RESUMO
Aim: To conduct a systematic review of the use of the recovery position in adults and children with non-traumatic decreased levels of responsiveness changes outcomes in comparison with other positioning strategies. Methods: We searched Medline (Ovid), Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, medRxiv and Google Scholar from inception to 15 March 2021 for studies involving adults and children in an out-of-hospital, first aid setting who had reduced levels of responsiveness of non-traumatic aetiology but did not require resuscitative interventions. We used the ROBINS-I tool to assess risk of bias and GRADE methodology to determine the certainty of evidence. Results: Of 17,947 citations retrieved, three prospective observational studies and four case series were included. The prone and semi-recumbent positions were associated with a decreased rate of suspected aspiration pneumonia in acute poisoning. Use of the recovery position in paediatric patients with decreased levels of responsiveness was associated with a deceased admission rate and the prone position was the position most commonly associated with sudden unexpected death in epilepsy. High risk of bias, imprecision and indirectness of evidence limited our ability to perform pooled analyses. Conclusion: We identified a limited number of observational studies and case series comparing outcomes following use of the recovery position with outcomes when other patient positions were used. There was limited evidence to support or revise existing first aid guidance; however, greater emphasis on the initial assessment of responsiveness and need for CPR, as well as the detection and management of patient deterioration of a person identified with decreased responsiveness, is recommended.
RESUMO
AIM: To identify and summarize the available science on prone resuscitation. To determine the value of undertaking a systematic review on this topic; and to identify knowledge gaps to aid future research, education and guidelines. METHODS: This review was guided by specific methodological framework and reporting items (PRISMA-ScR). We included studies, cases and grey literature regarding prone position and CPR/cardiac arrest. The databases searched were MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane CENTRAL, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Scopus and Google Scholar. Expanded grey literature searching included internet search engine, targeted websites and social media. RESULTS: Of 453 identified studies, 24 (5%) studies met our inclusion criteria. There were four prone resuscitation-relevant studies examining: blood and tidal volumes generated by prone compressions; prone compression quality metrics on a manikin; and chest computed tomography scans for compression landmarking. Twenty case reports/series described the resuscitation of 25 prone patients. Prone compression quality was assessed by invasive blood pressure monitoring, exhaled carbon dioxide and pulse palpation. Recommended compression location was zero-to-two vertebral segments below the scapulae. Twenty of 25 cases (80%) survived prone resuscitation, although few cases reported long term outcome (neurological status at hospital discharge). Seven cases described full neurological recovery. CONCLUSION: This scoping review did not identify sufficient evidence to justify a systematic review or modified resuscitation guidelines. It remains reasonable to initiate resuscitation in the prone position if turning the patient supine would lead to delays or risk to providers or patients. Prone resuscitation quality can be judged using end-tidal CO2, and arterial pressure tracing, with patients turned supine if insufficient.
