Question · asked by 1 review
Chlorhexidine (mouthrinse or gel), as part of oral hygiene care vs placebo or usual care: Incidence of VAP
- Population
- Critically ill patients (adults and children) receiving mechanical ventilation in ICU
- Intervention
- Chlorhexidine (mouthrinse or gel), as part of oral hygiene care
- Comparison
- placebo or usual care
- Outcome
- Incidence of VAP
Chlorhexidine (mouthrinse or gel), as part of oral hygiene care probably leads to lower incidence of VAP compared with placebo or usual care (moderate certainty).
What each review found
Current versions onlyNo studies found 0 · 0%GRADE not reported 1 · 20%Very low 0 · 0%Low 0 · 0%Moderate 3 · 60%High 1 · 20%
| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Chlorhexidine (mouthrinse or gel), as part of oral hygiene care vs Placebo or usual care Incidence of VAP · Critically ill patients (adults and children) receiving mechanical ventilation in ICU · Follow-up: mean 1 month Chlorhexidine (mouthrinse or gel), as part of oral hygiene care probably leads to lower incidence of VAP compared with placebo or usual care (moderate certainty). Oral hygiene care for critically ill patients to prevent ventilator‐associated pneumonia (2020) · Cochrane All outcomes | RR 0.67 [0.47, 0.97] | 13 studies · 1206 participants | Moderate |
Chlorhexidine (mouthrinse or gel), as part of oral hygiene care vs Placebo or usual care Incidence of VAP · Critically ill patients (adults and children) receiving mechanical ventilation in ICU · Children (3 months to 15 years) Chlorhexidine (mouthrinse or gel), as part of oral hygiene care showed no clear difference in incidence of VAP compared with placebo or usual care; GRADE not reported. Oral hygiene care for critically ill patients to prevent ventilator‐associated pneumonia (2016) · Cochrane All outcomesearlier version CD008367.PUB3, superseded | RR 1.04 [0.72, 1.51] | 3 studies · 342 participants | GRADE not reported |
Chlorhexidine (mouthrinse or gel), as part of oral hygiene care vs Placebo or usual care Incidence of VAP · Critically ill patients (adults and children) receiving mechanical ventilation in ICU · Follow-up: mean 1 month Chlorhexidine (mouthrinse or gel), as part of oral hygiene care leads to lower incidence of VAP compared with placebo or usual care (high certainty). Oral hygiene care for critically ill patients to prevent ventilator‐associated pneumonia (2016) · Cochrane All outcomesearlier version CD008367.PUB3, superseded | RR 0.75 [0.62, 0.91] | 18 studies · 2451 participants | High |
Chlorhexidine (mouthrinse or gel), as part of oral hygiene care vs Placebo or usual care Incidence of VAP · Critically ill patients (adults and children) receiving mechanical ventilation in ICU · Follow-up: mean 1 month Chlorhexidine (mouthrinse or gel), as part of oral hygiene care probably leads to lower incidence of VAP compared with placebo or usual care (moderate certainty). Oral hygiene care for critically ill patients to prevent ventilator‐associated pneumonia (2013) · Cochrane All outcomesearlier version CD008367.PUB2, superseded | OR 0.60 [0.47, 0.77] | 17 studies · 2402 participants | Moderate |
Chlorhexidine (mouthrinse or gel), as part of oral hygiene care vs Placebo or usual care Incidence of VAP · Critically ill patients (adults and children) receiving mechanical ventilation in ICU · Children (0 to 15 years) Chlorhexidine (mouthrinse or gel), as part of oral hygiene care showed no clear difference in incidence of VAP compared with placebo or usual care (moderate certainty). Oral hygiene care for critically ill patients to prevent ventilator‐associated pneumonia (2013) · Cochrane All outcomesearlier version CD008367.PUB2, superseded | OR 1.07 [0.65, 1.77] | 3 studies · 342 participants | Moderate |
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 |
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.