Trial reportHead & face medicine2025
Application of double-sleeve endotracheal tube in infection control for icu patients: a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Head & face medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPoor oral hygiene in patients with tracheal intubation will increase the occurrence of dental plaque and mucosal inflammation, resulting in oral barrier dysfunction. This study aimed to design and evaluate a novel double-lumen endotracheal tube (DETT) and explore its role in infection control, particularly its effects on the oral microenvironment and ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP).
methodsThis was a prospective, non-blinded, randomized parallel-controlled trial conducted from July 2024 to September 2024. A total of 115 patients who had been intubated for more than 3 days in a tertiary hospital ICU were enrolled and randomly assigned to either the DETT group (n = 58) or the conventional endotracheal tube (ETT) group (n = 57). Both groups received the same oral care protocols. The DETT group was intubated with the double-lumen endotracheal tube, which included a built-in bite block, while the ETT group used a standard endotracheal tube with a bite block. The primary outcome was the incidence of VAP, while secondary outcomes included oral bacterial colony counts, biofilm formation, BOAS oral health scores, and plaque index.
resultsCompared to the ETT group, the DETT group showed a significant reduction in VAP incidence (χ²=4.382, p < 0.05). The DETT group also had significantly lower oral bacterial colony counts (Z=-7.362, P < 0.05) and biofilm formation (χ²=5.472, p < 0.05), as well as better BOAS scores (Z=-2.774, p < 0.05). However, there were no significant differences between the two groups in pathogenic bacterial presence or plaque index (p > 0.05).
conclusionsThe novel double-lumen endotracheal tube effectively reduces the total bacterial load in the oral cavity, inhibits biofilm formation, and lowers the incidence of VAP. It also improves oral function and hygiene, contributing to infection control, and holds significant clinical value.
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.