Trial reportRevista Brasileira de terapia intensiva2013
Impact of tongue biofilm removal on mechanically ventilated patients.
Trial report in Revista Brasileira de terapia intensiva, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical Trial for Evaluating the Effectiveness and Safety of a New Dental Plaque Removal Device: Microscale Mist Unit.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Black hairy tongue in a patient with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis.Journal of International Society of Preventive & Community DentistryArticle
- Analysis of biofilm production by clinical isolates of Pseudomonas aeruginosa from patients with ventilator-associated pneumonia.Revista Brasileira de terapia intensivaArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the effectiveness of a tongue cleaner in the removal of tongue biofilm in mechanically ventilated patients.
methodsTongue biofilm and tracheal secretion samples were collected from a total of 50 patients: 27 in the study group (SG) who were intubated or tracheostomized under assisted ventilation and treated with the tongue cleaner and 23 in the control group (CG) who did not undergo tongue cleaning. Oral and tracheal secretion cultures of the SG (initially and after 5 days) and the CG (at a single time-point) were performed to evaluate the changes in bacterial flora.
resultsThe median age of the SG patients was 77 years (45-99 years), and that of the CG patients was 79 years (21-94 years). The length of hospital stay ranged from 17-1,370 days for the SG with a median stay of 425 days and from 4-240 days for the CG with a median stay of 120 days. No significant differences were found when the dental plaque indexes were compared between the SG and the CG. There was no correlation between the index and the length of hospital stay. The same bacterial flora was found in the dental plaque of 9 of the 27 SG patients before and after the tongue scraper was used for 5 days compared with the CG (p=0.683). Overall, 7 of the 27 SG patients had positive bacterial cultures for the same strains in both tongue biofilm and tracheal secretions compared with the CG (p=0.003). Significant similarities in strain resistance and susceptibility of the assessed microorganisms were observed between oral and tracheal microflora in 6/23 cases in the CG (p=0.006).
conclusionThe use of a tongue cleaner is effective at reducing tongue biofilm in patients on mechanical ventilation and facilitates oral hygiene interventions performed by caregivers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.