Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25932093›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of clinical and experimental medicine2015

Can routine oral care with antiseptics prevent ventilator-associated pneumonia in patients receiving mechanical ventilation? An update meta-analysis from 17 randomized controlled trials.

Longti Li, Zhibing Ai, Longzhu Li, Xuesong Zheng, Luo Jie

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of clinical and experimental medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Effects of hydrogen peroxide mouthwash on preventing ventilator-associated pneumonia in patients admitted to the intensive care unit.The Brazilian journal of infectious diseases : an official publication of the Brazilian Society of Infectious Diseases
    Trial
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Longti LiDepartment of Science and Research, Taihe Hospital, Hubei University of Medicine Shiyan 442000, Hubei Province, P. R. China.
Zhibing AiDepartment of Neurology, Taihe Hospital, Hubei University of Medicine Shiyan 442000, Hubei Province, P. R. China.
Longzhu LiDepartment of O&G, Shiyan Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine Shiyan 442000, Hubei Province, P. R. China.
Xuesong ZhengDepartment of Endocrine, Taihe Hospital, Hubei University of Medicine Shiyan 442000, Hubei Province, P. R. China.
Luo JieTaihe Hospital, Hubei University of Medicine Shiyan 442000, Hubei Province, P. R. China.
Hubei University of Medicine · CNPeople's Hospital of Shiyan · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWhether oral antiseptics could reduce the risk of ventilator associated pneumonia (VAP) in patients receiving mechanical ventilation remains controversial. We performed a meta-analysis to assess the effect of oral care with antiseptics on the prevalence of ventilator associated pneumonia in adult critically ill patients.

methodsA comprehensive search of PubMed, Embase and Web of Science were performed to identity relevant studies. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials of mechanically ventilated adult patients receiving oral care with antiseptics. The quality of included studies was assessed by the Jadad score. Relative risks (RRs), weighted mean differences (WMDs), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated and pooled using a fixed-effects model or random-effects model. Heterogeneity among the studies was assessed with I (2) test.

results17 studies with a total number of 4249 met the inclusion criteria. Of the 17 studies, 14 assessed the effect of chlorhexidine, and 3 investigated the effect of povidone-iodine. Overall, oral care with antiseptics significantly reduced the prevalence of VAP (RR=0.72, 95% CI: 0.57, 0.92; P=0.008). The use of chlorhexidine was shown to be effective (RR=0.73, 95% CI: 0.57, 0.93; P=0.012), whereas this effect was not observed in povidone-iodine (RR=0.51, 95% CI: 0.09, 2.82; P=0.438). Subgroup analyses showed that oral antiseptics were most marked in cardiac surgery patients (RR=0.54, 95% CI: 0.39, 0.74; P=0.00). Patients with oral antiseptics did not have a reduction in intensive care unit (ICU) mortality (RR=1.11, 95% CI: 0.95, 1.29; P=0.201), length of ICU stay (WMD=-0.10 days, 95% CI: -0.25, 0.05; P=0.188), or duration of mechanical ventilation (WMD=-0.05 days, 95% CI: -0.14, 0.04; P=0.260).

conclusionOral care with antiseptics significantly reduced the prevalence of VAP. Chlorhexidine application prevented the occurrence of VAP in mechanically ventilated patients but povidone-iodine did not. Further large-scale, well-designed randomized controlled trials are needed to identify the findings and determine the effect of povidone-iodine application.

Indexed as

antisepticsmeta-analysisOral careventilator associated pneumonia

Identifiers

PMID25932093
PMCPMC4402740
OpenAlexW1892034501

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.