west china medical publishers
Keyword
  • Title
  • Author
  • Keyword
  • Abstract
Advance search
Advance search

Search

find Keyword "Open tracheal suction system" 2 results
  • Closed versus Open Tracheal Suction Systems for Ventilator-associated Pneumonia in Adults: A Systematic Review

    Objective To determine the effect of closed tracheal suction system versus open tracheal suction system on the rate of ventilator-associated pneumonia in adults. Methods We searched The Cochrane Library (Issue 1, 2007), PubMed (1966 to 2006) and CBM (1980 to 2007), and also hand searched relevant journals. Randomized controlled trials involving closed tracheal suction system versus open tracheal suction system for ventilator-associated pneumonia in adults were included. Data were extracted and the quality of trials was critical assessed by two reviewers independently. The Cochrane Collaboration’s RevMan 4.2.8 software was used for data analyses. Result Five randomized controlled trials involving 739 patients were included. Results of meta-analyses showed that compared to open tracheal suction system, closed tracheal suction system did not increase the rate of ventilator-associated pneumonia (RR 0.83, 95%CI 0.50 to 1.37) or case fatality (RR 1.05, 95%CI 0.85 to 1.31). No significant differences were observed between open tracheal suction system and closed tracheal suction system in the total number of bacteria (RR 0.83, 95%CI 0.50 to 1.37), the number of SPP colony (RR 2.87, 95%CI 0.94 to 8.74) and the number of PSE colony (RR 1.46, 95%CI 0.76 to 2.77). There was no significant difference between the two groups in the duration of ventilation and length of hospital stay. Conclusion Open or closed tracheal suction systems have similar effects on the rate of ventilator-associated pneumonia, case fatality, the number of SPP and PSE colonies, duration of ventilation and length of hospital stay. However, due to the differences in interventions and statistical power among studies included in this systematic review, further studies are needed to determine the effect of closed or open tracheal suction systems on these outcomes.

    Release date:2016-09-07 02:12 Export PDF Favorites Scan
  • Efficacy of closed and open tracheal suction systems for prevention of ventilator-associated pneumonia: a meta-analysis

    ObjectiveTo systematically review the efficacy of closed and open tracheal suction system on the prevention of ventilator-associated pneumonia.MethodsThe Cochrane Library, CNKI, WanFang Data, Airiti Library, PubMed, CINAHL and Proquest databases were electronically searched to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on closed and open tracheal suction system on the prevention of ventilator-associated pneumonia. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data, and assessed the risk bias of included studies. Then, meta-analysis was performed by RevMan 5.3 software.ResultsA total of 11 RCTs involving 1 187 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that compared with open tracheal suction system, closed tracheal suction system was associated with a reduced incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia (RR=0.55, 95%CI 0.44 to 0.67, P<0.000 01), late-onset ventilator-associated pneumonia (RR=0.47, 95%CI 0.28 to 0.80, P=0.005), length of stay in intensive care unit (MD=−0.85, 95%CI −1.66 to −0.04, P=0.04) and rate of microbial colonization (RR=0.69, 95%CI 0.56 to 0.86, P=0.000 9). However, there were no significant differences between two groups in time to ventilator-associated pneumonia development (MD=0.96, 95%CI −0.21 to 2.12, P=0.11), length of mechanical ventilation (MD=−2.24, 95%CI −4.54 to 0.06, P=0.06), and rate of mortality (RR=0.88, 95%CI 0.73 to 1.05, P=0.15).ConclusionsCurrent evidence shows that compared with open tracheal suction system, closed tracheal suction system can reduce the incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia and late-onset ventilator-associated pneumonia, shorten the hospital stay in intensive care unit, and reduce rate of microbial colonization. Due to limited quality and quantity of the included studies, more high quality studies are required to verify above conclusions.

    Release date:2021-02-05 02:57 Export PDF Favorites Scan
1 pages Previous 1 Next

Format

Content