Does the Back Up head Elevated position benefit patient care?

The Back Up Head Elevated Position (HOB elevation) provides significant clinical advantages for various patient populations, particularly in critical care and during emergency procedures. This position is characterized by raising the head of the bed to an angle typically between 30° to 45°, though the optimal angle may vary based on specific patient needs and conditions.

One of the primary benefits of the head-elevated position is its role in reducing the incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP). Evidence shows that maintaining patients in a semi-recumbent (HOB elevated) position decreases the risk of aspiration of gastric contents and subsequently reduces the incidence of VAP in mechanically ventilated patients. Systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials indicate that elevations of at least 30° are recommended to mitigate the risk of VAP and associated complications (Keeley, 2007; Nieuwenhoven et al., 2006).

Additionally, for patients with respiratory conditions, the head-elevated position enhances pulmonary mechanics. This position can improve diaphragm function and optimize lung capacities, facilitating better oxygenation. Research suggests that during preoxygenation, the head-up position prolongs the safe apnea time and improves oxygen saturation levels (Ramkumar et al., 2011; Sakles, 2017). This is especially crucial for patients at increased risk of respiratory failure, where optimal positioning can help minimize the burden on respiratory muscles (Kaw et al., 2021).

Moreover, the head-elevated position benefits patients with acute ischemic stroke. Evidence indicates that a more upright posture can positively influence cerebral perfusion dynamics, potentially improving blood flow to ischemic tissues and enhancing recovery (Olavarría et al., 2014; Favilla et al., 2014). However, the effect is complex; it should be tailored to the individual patient's hemodynamic status to avoid negative outcomes such as hypotension (Niël-Weise et al., 2011; Dawson et al., 2004).

Despite these benefits, there are considerations regarding the head-elevated position. It is critical to assess hemodynamic stability, particularly in critically ill or hypovolemic patients, as this position could exacerbate hypotension due to decreased venous return (Suk et al., 2009; Nieuwenhoven et al., 2006). Additionally, careful management is required to balance the elevation against the risk of pressure injuries that may arise from prolonged positioning in the elevated state (Yu et al., 2022).

In summary, the Back Up Head Elevated Position serves as a strategic intervention to enhance patient outcomes in various clinical scenarios, particularly through the reduction of VAP, improvement of respiratory mechanics, and potential benefits in cerebral perfusion for stroke patients. However, careful attention to individual patient circumstances and the potential complications must guide its application in clinical settings.

References:

  • Dawson, E., Secher, N., Dalsgaard, M., Ogoh, S., Yoshiga, C., González‐Alonso, J., … & Raven, P. (2004). Standing up to the challenge of standing: a siphon does not support cerebral blood flow in humans. Ajp Regulatory Integrative and Comparative Physiology, 287(4), R911-R914.
    https://doi.org/10.1152/ajpregu.00196.2004
  • Favilla, C., Mesquita, R., Mullen, M., Durduran, T., Lu, X., Kim, M., … & Detre, J. (2014). Optical bedside monitoring of cerebral blood flow in acute ischemic stroke patients during head-of-bed manipulation. Stroke, 45(5), 1269-1274.
    https://doi.org/10.1161/strokeaha.113.004116
  • Kaw, R., Wong, J., & Mokhlesi, B. (2021). Obesity and obesity hypoventilation, sleep hypoventilation, and postoperative respiratory failure. Anesthesia & Analgesia, 132(5), 1265-1273.
    https://doi.org/10.1213/ane.0000000000005352
  • Keeley, L. (2007). Reducing the risk of ventilator‐acquired pneumonia through head of bed elevation. Nursing in Critical Care, 12(6), 287-294.
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1478-5153.2007.00247.x
  • Nieuwenhoven, C., Vandenbroucke‐Grauls, C., Tiel, F., Joore, H., Schijndel, R., Tweel, I., … & Bonten, M. (2006). Feasibility and effects of the semirecumbent position to prevent ventilator-associated pneumonia: a randomized study*. Critical Care Medicine, 34(2), 396-402.
    https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ccm.0000198529.76602.5e
  • Niël-Weise, B., Gastmeier, P., Kola, A., Vonberg, R., Wille, J., & Broek, P. (2011). An evidence-based recommendation on bed head elevation for mechanically ventilated patients. Critical Care, 15(2).
    https://doi.org/10.1186/cc10135
  • Olavarría, V., Arima, H., Anderson, C., Brunser, A., Venturelli, P., Héritier, S., … & Lavados, P. (2014). Head position and cerebral blood flow velocity in acute ischemic stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Cerebrovascular Diseases, 37(6), 401-408.
    https://doi.org/10.1159/000362533
  • Ramkumar, V., Umesh, G., & Philip, F. (2011). Preoxygenation with 20º head-up tilt provides longer duration of non-hypoxic apnea than conventional preoxygenation in non-obese healthy adults. Journal of Anesthesia, 25(2), 189-194.
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s00540-011-1098-3
  • Sakles, J. (2017). Maintenance of oxygenation during rapid sequence intubation in the emergency department. Academic Emergency Medicine, 24(11), 1395-1404.
    https://doi.org/10.1111/acem.13271
  • Suk, E., Kim, D., Kil, H., & Kweon, T. (2009). Effects of reverse trendelenburg position and inguinal compression on femoral vein cross‐sectional area in infants and young children. Anaesthesia, 64(4), 399-402.
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2044.2008.05815.x
  • Yu, M., Park, K., Shin, J., & Lee, J. (2022). Predicting the cut‐off point for interface pressure in pressure injury according to the standard hospital mattress and polyurethane foam mattress as support surfaces. International Wound Journal, 19(6), 1509-1517.
    https://doi.org/10.1111/iwj.13750


Recent blogs: