Comparative efficacy of various oral hygiene care methods in preventing ventilator-associated pneumonia in critically ill patients: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

IF 2.6 3区 综合性期刊 Q1 MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES PLoS ONE Pub Date : 2024-12-13 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0313057
Sachika Yamakita, Takeshi Unoki, Sachi Niiyama, Eri Natsuhori, Junpei Haruna, Tomoki Kuribara
{"title":"Comparative efficacy of various oral hygiene care methods in preventing ventilator-associated pneumonia in critically ill patients: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.","authors":"Sachika Yamakita, Takeshi Unoki, Sachi Niiyama, Eri Natsuhori, Junpei Haruna, Tomoki Kuribara","doi":"10.1371/journal.pone.0313057","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Oral hygiene care is important for ventilator-associated pneumonia prevention. However, the optimal oral hygiene care approach remains unclear. A network meta-analysis was conducted to compare the efficacy of various oral hygiene care methods for ventilator-associated pneumonia prevention in critically ill patients, and the methods were ranked. A literature search of three representative databases was conducted. We only analyzed parallel randomized controlled trials conducted to analyze the use antiseptics or toothbrushes in oral hygiene care for adult patients undergoing invasive mechanical ventilation in the intensive care unit. The outcome measure was the incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia. Bias risk was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool, and the confidence in the evidence was evaluated using the CINeMA approach. Statistical analyses were performed using R 4.2.0., GeMTC package, and JAGS 4.3.1. The review protocol was registered in PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42022333270). Thirteen randomized controlled trials were included in the qualitative synthesis and twelve randomized controlled trials (2395 participants) were included in the network meta-analysis. Over 50% of the included studies were conducted in medical-surgical intensive care units. Ten treatments were analyzed and 12 pairwise comparisons were conducted in the 12 included studies. Analysis using surface under the cumulative ranking curves revealed that brushing combined with chlorhexidine 0.12% was most likely the optimal intervention for preventing ventilator-associated pneumonia (88.4%), followed by the use of chlorhexidine 0.12% alone (76.1%), and brushing alone (73.2%). Oral hygiene care methods that included brushing had high rankings. In conclusion, brushing combined with chlorhexidine 0.12% may be an effective intervention for preventing ventilator-associated pneumonia in critically ill patients. Furthermore, brushing may be the optimal oral hygiene care method for preventing ventilator-associated pneumonia in the intensive care unit. Further research is needed to verify these findings as the CINeMA confidence rate was low for each comparison.</p>","PeriodicalId":20189,"journal":{"name":"PLoS ONE","volume":"19 12","pages":"e0313057"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11642986/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PLoS ONE","FirstCategoryId":"103","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0313057","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Oral hygiene care is important for ventilator-associated pneumonia prevention. However, the optimal oral hygiene care approach remains unclear. A network meta-analysis was conducted to compare the efficacy of various oral hygiene care methods for ventilator-associated pneumonia prevention in critically ill patients, and the methods were ranked. A literature search of three representative databases was conducted. We only analyzed parallel randomized controlled trials conducted to analyze the use antiseptics or toothbrushes in oral hygiene care for adult patients undergoing invasive mechanical ventilation in the intensive care unit. The outcome measure was the incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia. Bias risk was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool, and the confidence in the evidence was evaluated using the CINeMA approach. Statistical analyses were performed using R 4.2.0., GeMTC package, and JAGS 4.3.1. The review protocol was registered in PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42022333270). Thirteen randomized controlled trials were included in the qualitative synthesis and twelve randomized controlled trials (2395 participants) were included in the network meta-analysis. Over 50% of the included studies were conducted in medical-surgical intensive care units. Ten treatments were analyzed and 12 pairwise comparisons were conducted in the 12 included studies. Analysis using surface under the cumulative ranking curves revealed that brushing combined with chlorhexidine 0.12% was most likely the optimal intervention for preventing ventilator-associated pneumonia (88.4%), followed by the use of chlorhexidine 0.12% alone (76.1%), and brushing alone (73.2%). Oral hygiene care methods that included brushing had high rankings. In conclusion, brushing combined with chlorhexidine 0.12% may be an effective intervention for preventing ventilator-associated pneumonia in critically ill patients. Furthermore, brushing may be the optimal oral hygiene care method for preventing ventilator-associated pneumonia in the intensive care unit. Further research is needed to verify these findings as the CINeMA confidence rate was low for each comparison.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
不同口腔卫生护理方法预防危重患者呼吸机相关性肺炎的比较疗效:系统综述和网络meta分析。
口腔卫生保健对预防呼吸机相关性肺炎很重要。然而,最佳的口腔卫生保健方法仍不清楚。通过网络meta分析比较各种口腔卫生护理方法对危重患者呼吸机相关性肺炎预防的效果,并对方法进行排序。对三个有代表性的数据库进行文献检索。我们只分析平行随机对照试验,分析重症监护室有创机械通气成年患者使用防腐剂或牙刷进行口腔卫生护理的情况。结局指标为呼吸机相关性肺炎的发生率。使用Cochrane risk of Bias 2工具评估偏倚风险,使用CINeMA方法评估证据的置信度。采用r4.2.0进行统计分析。、GeMTC包和JAGS 4.3.1。该审查方案已在PROSPERO注册(注册号:CRD42022333270)。定性综合纳入13项随机对照试验,网络meta分析纳入12项随机对照试验(2395名受试者)。超过50%的纳入研究是在内科外科重症监护病房进行的。对纳入的12项研究进行了10项治疗分析和12项两两比较。累积排序曲线下的曲面分析显示,预防呼吸机相关性肺炎的最佳干预措施为刷牙联合使用0.12%氯己定(88.4%),其次为单独使用0.12%氯己定(76.1%)和单独刷牙(73.2%)。包括刷牙在内的口腔卫生保健方法排名较高。综上所述,刷牙联合氯己定可能是预防危重患者呼吸机相关性肺炎的有效干预措施。此外,刷牙可能是预防重症监护病房呼吸机相关性肺炎的最佳口腔卫生护理方法。需要进一步的研究来验证这些发现,因为每次比较的CINeMA置信率都很低。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
PLoS ONE
PLoS ONE 生物-生物学
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
5.40%
发文量
14242
审稿时长
3.7 months
期刊介绍: PLOS ONE is an international, peer-reviewed, open-access, online publication. PLOS ONE welcomes reports on primary research from any scientific discipline. It provides: * Open-access—freely accessible online, authors retain copyright * Fast publication times * Peer review by expert, practicing researchers * Post-publication tools to indicate quality and impact * Community-based dialogue on articles * Worldwide media coverage
期刊最新文献
Navigating work, family, and society: Challenges facing Jordanian female journalists. Cheminformatics-driven discovery of natural isoquinoline alkaloid inhibitors of Beta-secretase I for Alzheimer's management. Optimal design and operation of Photovoltage distributed generators and shunt compensators for the Vietnam alternative current distribution network to reduce annual energy loss. Cognitive impairment and depressive symptoms to predict renal outcome and mortality in older adult patients. Comparative analysis of the diversity within the B. bronchiseptica fimX locus.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1