洗必泰
医学
防腐剂
相对风险
荟萃分析
呼吸机相关性肺炎
内科学
置信区间
肺炎
子群分析
随机对照试验
临床试验
牙科
病理
作者
Sonia Labeau,Katrien Van de Vyver,Nele Brusselaers,Dirk Vogelaers,Stijn Blot
标识
DOI:10.1016/s1473-3099(11)70127-x
摘要
Background We did a systematic review and random effects meta-analysis of randomised trials to assess the effect of oral care with chlorhexidine or povidone-iodine on the prevalence of ventilator-associated pneumonia versus oral care without these antiseptics in adults. Methods Studies were identified through PubMed, CINAHL, Web of Science, CENTRAL, and complementary manual searches. Eligible studies were randomised trials of mechanically ventilated adult patients receiving oral care with chlorhexidine or povidone-iodine. Relative risks (RR) and 95% CIs were calculated with the Mantel-Haenszel model and heterogeneity was assessed with the I2 test. Findings 14 studies were included (2481 patients), 12 investigating the effect of chlorhexidine (2341 patients) and two of povidone-iodine (140 patients). Overall, antiseptic use resulted in a significant risk reduction of ventilator-associated pneumonia (RR 0.67; 95% CI 0.50–0.88; p=0.004). Chlorhexidine application was shown to be effective (RR 0.72; 95% CI 0.55–0.94; p=0.02), whereas the effect resulting from povidone-iodine remains unclear (RR 0.39; 95% CI 0.11–1.36; p=0.14). Heterogeneity was moderate (I2=29%; p=0.16) for the trials using chlorhexidine and high (I2=67%; p=0.08) for those assessing povidone-iodine use. Favourable effects were more pronounced in subgroup analyses for 2% chlorhexidine (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.31–0.91), and in cardiosurgical studies (RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.17–0.98). Interpretation This analysis showed a beneficial effect of oral antiseptic use in prevention of ventilator-associated pneumonia. Clinicians should take these findings into account when providing oral care to intubated patients. Funding None.
科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI