Cochrane · intervention · CD008367

Oral hygiene care for critically ill patients to prevent ventilator‐associated pneumonia

Zhao, T, Wu, X, Zhang, Q, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2020 · Cochrane Library

Oral HealthDental public health and special care4 versionsAMSTAR 2: not assessed
Full textEvery question was extracted from the full review (methods and results), not only its Summary of Findings table.
Questions
56
current version
GRADE rated
10
No studies
5
Included studies
40
as reported
No studies 5 · 8.9%Ungraded 41 · 73.2%Very low 4 · 7.1%Low 4 · 7.1%Moderate 2 · 3.6%High 0 · 0%

Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.

Review question

ElementPlanned (methods)Found (results)
PopulationCritically ill patients in hospital settings receiving mechanical ventilation (for a minimum of 48 hours), without VAP or respiratory infection at baselineCritically ill patients on mechanical ventilation in ICU; mostly adults, one study children, one newborns; conducted in China, USA, Brazil, Iran and others (n=5675)
InterventionOral hygiene care such as healthcare-professional-assisted toothbrushing, oral and pharyngeal cavity rinse, decontamination of oropharyngeal cavities with antisepticsChlorhexidine (n=13); Chlorhexidine vs other agents (n=7); Toothbrushing (n=8); Powered toothbrushing (n=1); Other oral care agents (n=15)
ComparisonNo treatment; placebo; usual care; or a different specific oral hygiene care procedurePlacebo/usual care; No toothbrushing; Manual toothbrushing; Other oral care agents (potassium permanganate, ozonated water, Nanosil, hydrogen peroxide, miswak, saline, water, bicarbonate)
OutcomesIncidence of VAP; Mortality; Duration of mechanical ventilation and/or ICU stay; Systemic antibiotic use; Colonisation of dental plaque/saliva/oropharyngeal mucosa/endotracheal aspirates; Oral health indices (gingival, plaque, bleeding, periodontal); Adverse effects; Caregivers' preferences; Economic dataIncidence of VAP; Mortality; Duration of ventilation; Duration of ICU stay; Systemic antibiotic use; Oral health indices; Adverse effects
Study designsRandomised controlled trials (RCTs) of oral hygiene care interventions (quasi-randomised excluded)RCT (n=40)
TimingNot specifiedFollow-up mean 1 month

Search date: 2020-02. Databases: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register; CENTRAL; MEDLINE Ovid; Embase Ovid; LILACS BIREME; CINAHL EBSCO; VIP Database; ClinicalTrials.gov; WHO ICTRP

Questions and results

Show all 4 versions

Chlorhexidine (mouthrinse or gel), as part of oral hygiene care vs Placebo or usual care

Population: Critically ill patients (adults and children) receiving mechanical ventilation in ICU
9 questions
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Caregivers' preferences for oral hygiene care
The outcome of caregivers' preferences was not reported by any study in this comparison.0 studiesNo studies
Oral health indices (plaque index)
Plaque index: Fu 2019 found a significant reduction in the chlorhexidine group; Ozcaka 2012 and Scannapieco 2009 found no difference; 3 studies; no usable pooled estimate.3 studiesUngraded
Duration of ICU stay
Follow-up: mean 1 month
MD -0.89 [-3.59, 1.82]5 studies · 627 participantsLow
Downgraded: imprecision, inconsistency
Incidence of VAP
Follow-up: mean 1 month
RR 0.67 [0.47, 0.97]
261 per 1000 vs 175 per 1000
13 studies · 1206 participantsModerate
Downgraded: inconsistency
Mortality
Follow-up: mean 1 month
RR 1.03 [0.80, 1.33]
190 per 1000 vs 247 per 1000
9 studies · 944 participantsModerate
Downgraded: imprecision
Adverse effects
Adverse effects: information from 2 studies; one stated there were none, the other reported mild reversible irritation of the oral mucosa; very low certainty. There was a lack of evidence about adverse effects.2 studiesVery low
Downgraded: imprecision, inconsistency
Duration of mechanical ventilation
Follow-up: mean 1 month
MD -1.10 [-3.20, 1.00]4 studies · 594 participantsVery low
Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, inconsistency
Cost / economic data
The outcome of cost was not reported by any study in this comparison.0 studiesNo studies
Duration of systemic antibiotic use
MD 0.65 [-0.58, 1.88]1 study · 146 participantsUngraded

Toothbrushing (with or without antiseptics), as part of oral hygiene care vs No toothbrushing (with or without antiseptics)

Population: Critically ill adults receiving mechanical ventilation in ICU
9 questions
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Incidence of VAP
Follow-up: mean 1 month
RR 0.61 [0.41, 0.91]
259 per 1000 vs 179 per 1000
5 studies · 910 participantsLow
Downgraded: risk of bias
Mortality
Follow-up: mean 1 month
RR 0.84 [0.67, 1.05]
250 per 1000 vs 210 per 1000
5 studies · 910 participantsLow
Downgraded: risk of bias
Systemic antibiotic use
This outcome was not reported by any of the studies in this comparison.0 studiesNo studies
Caregivers' preferences for oral hygiene care
The outcome of caregivers' preferences was not reported by any study in this comparison.0 studiesNo studies
Oral health indices (plaque score)
Plaque score: one study (Yao 2011) showed evidence of reduced plaque in the toothbrushing group; no usable pooled estimate.1 studyUngraded
Duration of mechanical ventilation
Follow-up: mean 1 month
MD -0.43 [-1.17, 0.30]4 studies · 810 participantsLow
Downgraded: risk of bias
Cost / economic data
The outcome of cost was not reported by any study in this comparison.0 studiesNo studies
Adverse effects
Adverse effects: information from two studies, which stated that there were none; very low certainty. There is a lack of evidence about adverse effects.2 studiesVery low
Downgraded: imprecision, inconsistency
Duration of ICU stay
Follow-up: mean 1 month
MD -1.89 [-3.52, -0.27]3 studies · 749 participantsVery low
Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision

Powered toothbrushing (as part of comprehensive oral care) vs Manual toothbrushing (standard oral care)

Population: Critically ill patients receiving mechanical ventilation in ICU
4 questions
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Incidence of VAP
RR 0.84 [0.37, 1.91]1 study · 78 participantsUngraded
Duration of ICU stay
MD -2.00 [-5.93, 1.93]1 study · 78 participantsUngraded
Mortality
RR 1.05 [0.16, 7.10]1 study · 78 participantsUngraded
Duration of mechanical ventilation
MD 0.00 [-1.78, 1.78]1 study · 78 participantsUngraded

Povidone iodine rinse vs Saline rinse or placebo

Population: Critically ill patients receiving mechanical ventilation in ICU
4 questions
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Mortality
RR 1.00 [0.66, 1.50]2 studies · 217 participantsUngraded
Incidence of VAP
RR 0.69 [0.50, 0.95]3 studies · 356 participantsUngraded
Duration of ICU stay
MD -0.35 [-3.90, 3.21]2 studies · 217 participantsUngraded
Adverse effects
Adverse effects (Seguin 2014): no evidence of a difference in acute respiratory distress syndrome (RR 11.00, 95% CI 0.62 to 195.61), agitation and/or hypertension (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.12 to 1.86), epistaxis (RR 0.14, 95%…1 studyUngraded

Povidone iodine rinse vs Usual care (suction alone, no rinse)

Population: Critically ill patients receiving mechanical ventilation in ICU
2 questions
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Incidence of VAP
Povidone iodine versus usual care (Seguin 2006, 67 participants): a reduction in VAP was found; single study, not replicated, interpret with caution.1 study · 67 participantsUngraded
Mortality
Povidone iodine versus usual care: single study (67 participants), no evidence of a difference in mortality.1 study · 67 participantsUngraded

Saline rinse vs Saline-soaked swab

Population: Critically ill patients receiving mechanical ventilation in ICU
3 questions
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Duration of mechanical ventilation
MD -6.83 [-8.94, -4.72]2 studies · 176 participantsUngraded
Mortality
RR 0.29 [0.12, 0.69]2 studies · 270 participantsUngraded
Incidence of VAP
RR 0.47 [0.37, 0.62]4 studies · 488 participantsUngraded

Saline rinse plus swab vs Saline-soaked swab alone (usual care)

Population: Critically ill patients receiving mechanical ventilation in ICU
2 questions
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Incidence of VAP
RR 0.41 [0.23, 0.72]2 studies · 153 participantsUngraded
Duration of mechanical ventilation
MD -3.91 [-5.85, -1.97]1 study · 47 participantsUngraded

Saline rinse vs Usual care (no rinse)

Population: Critically ill patients receiving mechanical ventilation in ICU
4 questions
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Duration of mechanical ventilation
MD -0.40 [-2.55, 1.75]2 studies · 324 participantsUngraded
Duration of ICU stay
MD -1.17 [-3.95, 1.60]2 studies · 324 participantsUngraded
Incidence of VAP
RR 0.60 [0.39, 0.91]2 studies · 324 participantsUngraded
Mortality
RR 1.10 [0.87, 1.39]2 studies · 324 participantsUngraded

Sodium bicarbonate rinse (plus toothbrushing) vs Water rinse (plus toothbrushing)

Population: Critically ill patients receiving mechanical ventilation in ICU
2 questions
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Incidence of VAP
RR 1.57 [0.62, 3.99]2 studies · 347 participantsUngraded
Adverse effects
Adverse effects (Berry 2011, CHX versus sodium bicarbonate versus water): no adverse events were reported associated with the interventions.1 studyUngraded

Triclosan rinse vs Saline rinse

Population: Critically ill patients receiving mechanical ventilation in ICU
3 questions
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Duration of mechanical ventilation
MD -5.24 [-5.64, -4.84]1 study · 324 participantsUngraded
Incidence of VAP
RR 0.89 [0.71, 1.12]1 study · 324 participantsUngraded
Duration of ICU stay
MD -4.97 [-5.55, -4.39]1 study · 324 participantsUngraded

Listerine (essential oils) rinse vs Sterile water rinse

Population: Critically ill patients receiving mechanical ventilation in ICU
1 question
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Incidence of VAP
Listerine versus sterile water (Berry 2013): no evidence of a difference in VAP incidence; single study, high risk of bias.1 studyUngraded

Listerine (essential oils) rinse vs Sodium bicarbonate rinse

Population: Critically ill patients receiving mechanical ventilation in ICU
1 question
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Incidence of VAP
Listerine versus sodium bicarbonate (Berry 2013): no evidence of a difference in VAP incidence; single study, high risk of bias.1 studyUngraded

Biotene OralBalance vs Control

Population: Critically ill patients receiving mechanical ventilation in ICU
2 questions
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Incidence of VAP
Biotene OralBalance versus control (Stefanescu 2013, 41 participants): no difference in incidence of VAP; single study, high risk of bias.1 study · 41 participantsUngraded
Adverse effects
Adverse effects (Stefanescu 2013): no significant difference between groups with respect to adverse events in buccal mucosa.1 studyUngraded

Chlorhexidine vs Potassium permanganate

Population: Critically ill patients receiving mechanical ventilation in ICU
2 questions
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Incidence of VAP
RR 0.87 [0.50, 1.52]2 studiesUngraded
Mortality
RR 1.11 [0.89, 1.38]2 studiesUngraded

Chlorhexidine vs Ozonated water

Population: Critically ill patients receiving mechanical ventilation in ICU
1 question
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Incidence of VAP
Chlorhexidine versus ozonated water (Hanifi 2017): some evidence of a benefit for ozonated water; single study, not replicated, interpret with caution.1 studyUngraded

Chlorhexidine vs Nanosil (nanosilver)

Population: Critically ill patients receiving mechanical ventilation in ICU
2 questions
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Incidence of VAP
Chlorhexidine versus Nanosil (Khaky 2018): some evidence of a benefit for Nanosil; single study, not replicated, interpret with caution.1 studyUngraded
Mortality
Chlorhexidine versus Nanosil (Khaky 2018): no evidence of a difference in mortality; single study.1 studyUngraded

Chlorhexidine vs Hydrogen peroxide

Population: Critically ill patients receiving mechanical ventilation in ICU
1 question
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Incidence of VAP
Chlorhexidine versus hydrogen peroxide (Dahiya 2012): no evidence of a difference in incidence of VAP; single study.1 studyUngraded

Chlorhexidine vs Miswak

Population: Critically ill patients receiving mechanical ventilation in ICU
1 question
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Incidence of VAP
Chlorhexidine versus miswak (Irani 2019): no evidence of a difference in incidence of VAP; single study. Also no difference in number treated with systemic antibiotics.1 studyUngraded

Hydrogen peroxide vs Normal saline

Population: Critically ill patients receiving mechanical ventilation in ICU
1 question
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Incidence of VAP
Hydrogen peroxide versus normal saline (Nobahar 2016): a reduction in VAP was found; single study, not replicated, interpret with caution.1 studyUngraded

Potassium permanganate vs Placebo

Population: Critically ill patients receiving mechanical ventilation in ICU
2 questions
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Mortality
Potassium permanganate versus placebo (Meidani 2018, 100 participants): no evidence of a difference in mortality; single study.1 study · 100 participantsUngraded
Incidence of VAP
Potassium permanganate versus placebo (Meidani 2018): no evidence of a difference in VAP incidence; single study.1 studyUngraded