Contra-indications were barely present in this cohort. Nonetheless, this might have introduced misclassification bias. The
Contra-indications were barely present in this cohort. Nonetheless, this might have introduced misclassification bias. The choice of ICUs was determined by the private contacts between steering Oxcarbazepine-d4-1 web committee members and ICUs that participated in current study projects of ventilation, which could have resulted in an overrepresentation of units with far more knowledge in prone positioning, and for that reason a larger incidence. Similar to other epidemiological studies, access to patients’ data was restricted to data collectors who were granted access only to patients that had been labeled eligible for participation by the neighborhood doctors–thus, we couldn’t manage whether all COVID-19 patients receiving invasive ventilation in participating ICUs have been enrolled. Lastly, the national character of PRoVENT-COVID may possibly make these final results not representative for other nations. The findings of this study extend our understanding on the incidence and practice of prone positioning in individuals with ARDS as a consequence of COVID-19, along with the association of this intervention with outcomes. Our findings may have significant suggestions for clinical management. 5. Conclusions Within this national cohort of sufferers with ARDS due to COVID-19, prone positioning was regularly used, even in individuals that did not have an indication for this intervention. Prone positioning could strengthen the outcome of invasively ventilated individuals with an indication for this intervention. Components that had an association with its use had been ARDS severity and set FiO2 .Supplementary Components: The following are offered online at mdpi/article/ ten.3390/jcm10204783/s1, Table S1: Univariable and Multivariable Model of Covariates Chosen for Inclusion in the Final Model Mortality, Table S2: Univariable and Multivariable Model linear mixed model initiation prone positioning, Table S3: Time dependent cox regression evaluation, Figure S1: Distribution curves 4 groups tidal volume, PEEP, driving stress and compliance day 1, Figure S2: Distribution curves four groups P/F ratio, FiO2, PO2, PCO2 day 1, Figure S3: Distribution curves four groups tidal volume, PEEP, driving stress and compliance day 2, Figure S4: Distribution curves four groups P/F ratio, FiO2, PO2, PCO2 day two, Figure S5: Distribution curves 4 groups tidal volume, PEEP, driving pressure and compliance day three, Figure S6: Distribution curves four groups P/F ratio, FiO2, PO2, PCO2 day 3, Figure S7: Line graphs tidal volume, driving pressure, PEEP and compliance day 0, 1, 2, three, Figure S8: Line graphs P/F ratio, PO2, PCO2, FiO2 for day 0, 1, two, three, Figure S9: Outcomes.J. Clin. Med. 2021, ten,13 ofAuthor Contributions: Conceptualization, all authors; methodology, all authors; formal evaluation, W.S., D.M.P.v.M. as well as a.S.N.; writing–original draft preparation, W.S., D.M.P.v.M. and C.M.A.V.; writing–review and editing, M.J.S. and F.P.; visualization, W.S., D.M.P.v.M. plus a.S.N.; supervision, M.J.S., F.P. and also a.S.N.; funding acquisition, W.S., M.J.S. and F.P. All authors have read and agreed towards the published version on the manuscript. Funding: The PRoVENT-COVID study was funded by Amsterdam UMC, place AMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Analysis time from W. Stilma was funded by a private (PhD fellowship) grant from NWO MTIC-d3 Epigenetics Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Analysis, number 023.011.016. Institutional Overview Board Statement: The study protocol was approved by the ethics committee in Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, the Netherlands (registration number W20_157 # 20.171); the will need for in-.