ArticleTanaffos2023
Impact of Rose Water Mouthwash on Prevention of Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia in Intensive Care Unit: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
Article in Tanaffos, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Preventing Ventilator- Associated Pneumonia (VAP) is an important strategy to increase the quality of provided care for patients under mechanical ventilation. Rose water is the main product of Materials and Methods: This study was a randomized, controlled, single-center trial. 88 patients in a 21-bed surgical Intensive Care Unit (ICU) who were under mechanical ventilation met the inclusion criteria, and 80 patients fulfilled the study. Based on receiving either rose water and chlorhexidine solution or chlorhexidine solution alone, the patients were divided into two groups of control and intervention. The incidence of VAP up to 14 days was the primary outcome. Duration of mechanical ventilation, the ICU length of stay, and mortality in ICU were the secondary outcomes. Results: There was no significant difference in demographic data, the incidence of VAP, the incidence of late-onset VAP, mechanical ventilation days, length of the ICU stay, and mortality between the two groups. However, the incidence of early-onset VAP in the intervention group was significantly lower than in the control group (p= 0.021). Conclusion: Rose water mouthwash significantly reduced the risk of early-onset VAP without any effect on late-onset VAP.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37920313PMC10618586W4388302509What 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.