Question · asked by 1 review
Povidone iodine rinse vs usual or supportive care: All‐cause mortality
- Population
- Critically ill patients receiving mechanical ventilation in ICU
- Intervention
- Povidone iodine rinse
- Comparison
- usual or supportive care
- Outcome
- All‐cause mortality
What each review found
Current versions onlyNo studies found 0 · 0%GRADE not reported 2 · 100%Very low 0 · 0%Low 0 · 0%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%
| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Povidone iodine rinse vs Usual care (suction alone, no rinse) Mortality · Critically ill patients receiving mechanical ventilation in ICU Oral hygiene care for critically ill patients to prevent ventilator‐associated pneumonia (2020) · Cochrane All outcomes | Povidone iodine versus usual care: single study (67 participants), no evidence of a difference in mortality. | 1 study · 67 participants | GRADE not reported |
Povidone iodine rinse vs Usual care (suction alone, no rinse) Mortality · Critically ill patients receiving mechanical ventilation in ICU Oral hygiene care for critically ill patients to prevent ventilator‐associated pneumonia (2016) · Cochrane All outcomesearlier version CD008367.PUB3, superseded | Povidone iodine versus usual care: single study (67 participants), no evidence of a difference in mortality. | 1 study · 67 participants | GRADE not reported |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oral hygiene care for critically ill patients to prevent ventilator‐associated pneumonia 2020 · Cochrane All outcomes | 2020-02 | Not listed | Not assessed |
Related questions
The same intervention and outcome, asked in another population or against another comparator.
- Povidone iodine rinse vs Saline rinse or placebo · Critically ill patients receiving mechanical ventilation in ICU · 1 review
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.