Summary of findings for the main comparison. Lateral positioning compared with supine immobilization.

Lateral positioning compared with supine immobilization for critically ill adult patients
Patient or population: critically ill adult patients Settings: critical care areas Intervention: 2‐hourly lateral positioning schedule for 24 hours Comparison: supine position for 24 hours
Outcomes	Number of participants (studies)	Quality of the evidence (GRADE)	Comments
Mortality ‐ not measured	‐	See comment	No studies within search strategy
Morbiditya ‐ not reported	85 (2 studies)	See comment	Acute lung pathology data not availablea
GRADE Working Group grades of evidence High quality: Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect Moderate quality: Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate Low quality: Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate Very low quality: We are very uncertain about the estimate

^aSummary statistics not available from 2 RCTs (n = 85) that examined the incidence of atelectasis (including lobar, segmental or platelet‐like atelectasis), pneumonia or parenchymal infiltrates, pleural effusion, pulmonary oedema or pneumothorax present on chest x‐ray 1 to 3 days after cardiac surgery