Vasoconstrictor Agent Administration as a Risk Factor for Pressure Injury Development in Intensive Care Unit Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
{"title":"Vasoconstrictor Agent Administration as a Risk Factor for Pressure Injury Development in Intensive Care Unit Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Wen Tang, Ai-Ping Li, Wan-Qing Zhang, Shi-Qi Hu, Wang-Qin Shen, Hong-Lin Chen","doi":"10.1089/wound.2022.0081","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Significance:</b> Pressure injury (PI) is a common critical presentation in intensive care units (ICU) and is an important clinical concern in critical care settings. Some developing data support the vasoconstrictor agent administration as a potential risk factor; however, synthesis of available evidence has not been completed. <b>Recent Advances:</b> Comprehensive tactics were employed to search electronic databases PubMed, Web of Science, and Ovid Embase for data on vasoconstrictor agent administration associated with PI in ICU patients. Extraction was limited to studies that matched the inclusion criteria. The pooled odds ratio and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were calculated for dichotomous outcomes. <b>Critical Issues:</b> Twenty-six studies were included, involving 50,192 patients who matched the selection criteria. Around 5.8% of patients (2,523/43,210) got PI in total. PI occurred in 10.9% (1,496/13,675) of the vasoconstrictor agent administration population and 3.5% (1,027/29,503) of the drug-free population. The pooled unadjusted odds ratio was 2.83 (95% CI = 2.21-3.64, <i>p</i> < 0.001). The adjusted odds ratio was 1.83 (95% CI = 1.26-2.68, <i>p</i> = 0.002). Subgroup analysis and meta-regression found that the risk of PI did not vary with research design, time of occurrence, patient age, or male proportion. <b>Future Directions:</b> Vasoconstrictor agent administration raised the risk of PI in critical care patients by nearly twofold. More emphasis should be placed on the timely prevention of PI in patients receiving vasoconstrictor agent administration in the ICU.</p>","PeriodicalId":7413,"journal":{"name":"Advances in wound care","volume":"12 10","pages":"560-573"},"PeriodicalIF":5.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in wound care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/wound.2022.0081","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/11 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DERMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
Abstract
Significance: Pressure injury (PI) is a common critical presentation in intensive care units (ICU) and is an important clinical concern in critical care settings. Some developing data support the vasoconstrictor agent administration as a potential risk factor; however, synthesis of available evidence has not been completed. Recent Advances: Comprehensive tactics were employed to search electronic databases PubMed, Web of Science, and Ovid Embase for data on vasoconstrictor agent administration associated with PI in ICU patients. Extraction was limited to studies that matched the inclusion criteria. The pooled odds ratio and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were calculated for dichotomous outcomes. Critical Issues: Twenty-six studies were included, involving 50,192 patients who matched the selection criteria. Around 5.8% of patients (2,523/43,210) got PI in total. PI occurred in 10.9% (1,496/13,675) of the vasoconstrictor agent administration population and 3.5% (1,027/29,503) of the drug-free population. The pooled unadjusted odds ratio was 2.83 (95% CI = 2.21-3.64, p < 0.001). The adjusted odds ratio was 1.83 (95% CI = 1.26-2.68, p = 0.002). Subgroup analysis and meta-regression found that the risk of PI did not vary with research design, time of occurrence, patient age, or male proportion. Future Directions: Vasoconstrictor agent administration raised the risk of PI in critical care patients by nearly twofold. More emphasis should be placed on the timely prevention of PI in patients receiving vasoconstrictor agent administration in the ICU.
意义:压力损伤(PI)是重症监护室(ICU)常见的危重表现,也是重症监护环境中一个重要的临床问题。一些发展中的数据支持血管收缩剂给药是一个潜在的风险因素;然而,现有证据的综合尚未完成。最新进展:采用综合策略搜索电子数据库PubMed、Web of Science和Ovid Embase,以获取ICU患者中与PI相关的血管收缩剂给药数据。提取仅限于符合纳入标准的研究。计算合并优势比和95%置信区间(95%CI)以获得二分结果。关键问题:纳入26项研究,涉及50192名符合选择标准的患者。总计约5.8%的患者(2523/43210)得到PI。PI发生在血管收缩剂给药人群的10.9%(1496/13675)和无药物人群的3.5%(1027/29503)。合并后未经调整的比值比为2.83(95%置信区间 = 2.21-3.64,p p = 0.002)。亚组分析和元回归发现,PI的风险与研究设计、发生时间、患者年龄或男性比例无关。未来方向:血管收缩剂给药使重症监护患者患PI的风险增加了近两倍。在ICU接受血管收缩剂给药的患者中,应更加重视及时预防PI。
期刊介绍:
Advances in Wound Care rapidly shares research from bench to bedside, with wound care applications for burns, major trauma, blast injuries, surgery, and diabetic ulcers. The Journal provides a critical, peer-reviewed forum for the field of tissue injury and repair, with an emphasis on acute and chronic wounds.
Advances in Wound Care explores novel research approaches and practices to deliver the latest scientific discoveries and developments.
Advances in Wound Care coverage includes:
Skin bioengineering,
Skin and tissue regeneration,
Acute, chronic, and complex wounds,
Dressings,
Anti-scar strategies,
Inflammation,
Burns and healing,
Biofilm,
Oxygen and angiogenesis,
Critical limb ischemia,
Military wound care,
New devices and technologies.