Skip to main content

Table 4 Statistical data extraction table of included systematic review and meta-analysis studies

From: Prone positioning effect on tracheal intubation rate, mortality and oxygenation parameters in awake non-intubated severe COVID-19-induced respiratory failure: a review of reviews

Author/year/reference

Effect model

Study statistical data

Tracheal intubation

Mortality

PaO2/FiO2 ratio

pre/after PP

SpO2 (%)

Fazzini et al., 2021 [18]

Random effect model

Study (N)

patient(N)

APP (N)/ SP (N)

APP (event N)/ SP (event N)

RR (95% CI)

MD (95% CI)

p-value

Heterogeneity (I2,p)

7

2095

824/1271

284/616

0.72 [0.43, 1.22]

–

0.22

75%, 0.0006

6

2011

771/1240

150/312

0.57 [0.36, 0.93]

–

0.02

51%, 0.07

4

189 (pre/after APP)

189 )pre/after APP(

NR

–

− 23.10 [− 34.80, − 11.39]

0.0001

26%, 0.26

 

E.X. Chua et al., 2021 [19]

Random effect model

Study (N)

Patient (N)

APP (N)/ SP (N)

APP (event N)/ SP (event N)

RR (95% CI)

MD (95% CI)

p-value

Heterogeneity (I2,p)

5

626

223/403

80/143

1.20 [0.77, 1.86]

–

0.42

25%, 0.25

4

427

168/259

20/72

0.35 [0.16, 0.75]

–

0.007

28%, 0.22

5

423

172/251

NR

–

68.81 [15.94, 121.69]

0.01

91%, < 0.00001

8

566

273/293

NR

–

5.51 [3.17, 7.85]

 < 0.00001

95%, < 0.00001

Schmid et al., 2022 [20]

Random effect model

Study (N)

Patient (N)

APP (N)/ SP (N)

APP (event N)/ SP (event N)

RR (95% CI)

MD (95% CI)

p-value

Heterogeneity (I2,p)

2

1196

600/596

NR

0.83 [0.71–0.96]

–

NR

NR

2

1196

600/596

NR

1.08 [0.51–2.31]

–

NR

NR

  

Pavlov et al., 2022 [21]

Random effect model

Study (N)

Patient (N)

APP (N)/ SP (N)

APP (event N)/ SP (event N)

RR (95% CI)

MD (95% CI)

p-value

Heterogeneity (I2,p)

25

1722

870/852

NR

0.27 [0.19, 0.37]

–

0.71

88%, < 0.01

20

1528

767/761

NR

0.11 [0.06, 0.20]

–

0.1

91%, < 0.01

  

Ponnapa Reddy et al., 2021 [22]

Random effect model

Study (N)

Patient (N)

APP (N)/ SP (N)

APP (event N)/ SP (event N)

RR (95% CI)

MD (95% CI)

p-value

Heterogeneity (I2,p)

15

697/699(pre/after APP)

NR

NR

0.24 [0.17–0.32]

–

NR

74.25%, 0.00

13

390

NR

NR

0.13 [0.06, 0.19]

–

NR

83.55%, 0.00

22

695/695(pre/after APP)

NR

NR

–

39.47 [24.85, 54.10]

0.001

99.67%, 0.00

12

38/38(pre/after APP)

NR

NR

–

4.74[3.26, 6.23]

0.001

96.31%, 0.00

Sryma PB et al., 2021 [23]

Random effect model

Study (N)

Patient (N)

APP (N)/ SP (N)

APP (event N)/ SP (event N)

RR (95% CI)

MD (95% CI)

p-value

Heterogeneity (I2,p)

15

334(pre/after APP)

NR

NR

0.25[0.16,0.34]

–

NR

62.16%, 0.00

 

4

91 (pre/after APP)

NR

NR

–

− 51.29 [− 88.67, − 13.91]

0.007

72%, 0.01

4

88 (pre/after APP)

NR

NR

–

− 5.39 [− 9.25, − 1.53]

0.006

97%, < 0.00001

M. T Awad et al., 2021 [24]

Random effect model

Study (N)

Patient (N)

APP (N)/ SP (N)

APP (event N)/ SP (event N)

RR (95% CI)

MD (95% CI)

p-value

Heterogeneity (I2,p)

3

425

135/290

63/117

1.48 [0.75, 2.93]

–

0.26

53.56%, 0.11

3

397

129/268

24/67

0.54 [0.22, 1.33]

–

0.18

59.18%, 0.08

  

Beran et al., 2021 [25]

Random effect model

Study (N)

Patient (N)

APP (N)/ SP (N)

APP (event N)/ SP (event N)

RR (95% CI)

MD (95% CI)

p-value

Heterogeneity (I2,p)

14

3324

1495/1829

403/545

0.85 [0.66, 1.08]

–

0.17

63%, 0.002

14

3242

1472/1770

263/400

0.68 [0.51, 0.90]

–

0.008

52%, 0.02

  

Cardona et al., 2021 [26]

Random effect model

Study (N)

Patient (N)

APP (N)/ SP (N)

APP (event N)/ SP (event N)

RR (95% CI)

MD (95% CI)

p-value

Heterogeneity (I2,p)

18

364

NR

NR

28.4% [20.1, 38.4]

–

0.000

63%, 0.001

13

272

NR

NR

14.1% [7.6, 24.7]

–

0.000

62%, 0.002

  

R. S. Cruz et al., 2021 [27]

Fixed effects (I2 < 20%) or random effects (I2 ≥ 20%)

Study (N)

Patient (N)

APP (N)/ SP (N)

APP (event N)/ SP (event N)

RR (95% CI)

MD(95% CI)

p-value

Heterogeneity (I2,p)

7

1401

717/684

208/249

0.82 [0.71, 0.95]

–

0.009

0%, 0.49

7

1401

717/684

133/144

0.90 [0.73, 1.11]

–

0.34

16%, 0.31

  

Jie Li et al., 2022 [28]

Random effects to heterogeneity and fixed effects to evaluate small studies influence

(a)

Study (N)

Patient (N)

APP (N)/ SP (N)

APP (event N)/ SP (event N)

RR (95% CI)

MD(95% CI)

p-value

Heterogeneity (I2,p)

RCTs

10

1985

1013/972

216/255

0.84 [0·72–0·97]

–

NR

0%, 0.96

RCTs

10

1985

1013/972

135/143

1·00 [0·70 − 1·44]

–

NR

0%, 0.79

  

(b)

Study (N)

Patient (N)

APP (N)/ SP (N)

APP (event N)/ SP (event N)

RR (95% CI)

MD(95% CI)

p-value

Heterogeneity (I2,p)

Non-RCTs

18

2506

1066/1440

254/626

0.62 [0.47, 0.83]

–

NR

65%, < 0.01

Non-RCTs

17

2501

1080/1421

187/433

0.56 [0.48–0.65]

–

NR

0%, 0.49

  

W. Tan et al., 2021 [29]

Random effect model

Study (N)

Patient(N)

APP (N)/ SP (N)

APP (event N)/ SP (event N)

RR (95% CI)

MD(95% CI)

p-value

Heterogeneity (I2,p)

11

195

NR

NR

0.32 [0.23, 0.43]

–

NR

36%

9

138

NR

NR

0.03[0.00, 0.07]

–

NR

0%

4

61 (pre/after APP)

NR

NR

–

52.06 [5.36, 98.76]

0.03

81%, 0.005

5

112 (pre/after APP)

NR

NR

–

5.23 [1.25, 9.22]

0.01

98%, < 0.00001

  1. PaO2/FiO2 Pressure of Arterial Oxygen to Fractional Inspired Oxygen Concentration, SpO2 Spot Oxygen Saturation, PaCO2 measured the partial pressure of carbon dioxide in arterial blood, N number, CI Confidence Interval, RR Respiratory Rate, MD Mean Difference, RCT Randomized Clinical Trial, PP Prone Position, pre/after APP before and after awake prone positioning, APP (N)/ SP (N) number of patients in awake prone position group/number of patient in supine group, APP (event N)/ SP (event N) number of event(intubation or mortality) in awake prone positioning group/ number of event(intubation or mortality) in supine position group
Back to article page

European Journal of Medical Research

ISSN: 2047-783X

Contact us