In the last few years prone positioning has been used increasingly in the treatment of patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and this manoeuvre is now considered a simple and safe method to improve oxygenation. However, the physiological mechanisms causing respiratory function improvement as well as the real clinical benefit are not yet fully understood. The aim of this review is to discuss the physiological and clinical effects of prone positioning in patients with ARDS.The main physiological aims of prone positioning are: 1) to improve oxygenation; 2) to improve respiratory mechanics; 3) to homogenise the pleural pressure gradient, the alveolar inflation and the ventilation distribution; 4) to increase lung volume and reduce the amount of atelectatic regions; 5) to facilitate the drainage of secretions; and 6) to reduce ventilator-associated lung injury.According to the available data, the authors conclude that: 1) oxygenation improves iny70-80% of patients with early acute respiratory distress syndrome; 2) the beneficial effects of oxygenation reduce after 1 week of mechanical ventilation; 3) the aetiology of acute respiratory distress syndrome may markedly affect the response to prone positioning; 4) extreme care is necessary when the manoeuvre is performed; 5) pressure sores are frequent and related to the number of pronations; 6) the supports used to prone and during positioning are different and nonstandardised among centres; and 7) intensive care unit and hospital stay and mortality still remain high despite prone positioning. Eur Respir J 2002; 20: 1017-1028. Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is characterised by radiographical diffuse bilateral infiltrates, decreased respiratory compliance, small lung volumes and severe hypoxaemia. Correction of lifethreatening hypoxia and improvement of respiratory mechanics and lung volumes are the main treatment goals. To achieve these ends, it is important to select the most appropriate means of ventilatory support, thereby minimising the damaging effects of mechanical ventilation. Currently, ventilatory support using small tidal volumes and low plateau pressures and respiratory rate, to control arterial carbon dioxide tension (Pa,CO 2 ) and pH, are considered optimal [1]. Moreover, the application of relatively high levels of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) seems to be beneficial in reducing ventilator-associated lung injury (VALI) and improving survival [2]. In 1974, BRYAN [3] suggested that anaesthetised and paralysed patients in the prone position should exhibit better expansion of the dorsal lung regions with a consequent improvement in oxygenation. In 1976, PIEHL and BROWN [4] showed, in a retrospective study, that the prone position improved oxygenation in five patients with ARDS without deleterious effects. One year later, DOUGLAS et al. [5] demonstrated, in a prospective study with a limited group of ARDS patients, that prone positioning could effectively improve oxygenation in ARDS. Starting from these repor...