Brushing teeth with purified water to reduce ventilator-associated pneumonia

Association Between Daily Toothbrushing and Hospital-Acquired Pneumonia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Importance

Hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) is the most common and morbid health care-associated infection, but limited data on effective prevention strategies are available.

Objective

To determine whether daily toothbrushing is associated with lower rates of HAP and other patient-relevant outcomes.

Data Sources

A search of PubMed, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, Scopus, and 3 trial registries was performed from inception through March 9, 2023.

Study Selection

Randomized clinical trials of hospitalized adults comparing daily oral care with toothbrushing vs regimens without toothbrushing.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

Data extraction and risk of bias assessments were performed in duplicate. Meta-analysis was performed using random-effects models.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome of this systematic review and meta-analysis was HAP. Secondary outcomes included hospital and intensive care unit (ICU) mortality, duration of mechanical ventilation, ICU and hospital lengths of stay, and use of antibiotics. Subgroups included patients who received invasive mechanical ventilation vs those who did not, toothbrushing twice daily vs more frequently, toothbrushing provided by dental professionals vs general nursing staff, electric vs manual toothbrushing, and studies at low vs high risk of bias.

Results

A total of 15 trials met inclusion criteria, including 10 742 patients (2033 in the ICU and 8709 in non-ICU departments; effective population size was 2786 after shrinking the population to account for 1 cluster randomized trial in non-ICU patients). Toothbrushing was associated with significantly lower risk for HAP (risk ratio [RR], 0.67 [95% CI, 0.56-0.81]) and ICU mortality (RR, 0.81 [95% CI, 0.69-0.95]). Reduction in pneumonia incidence was significant for patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation (RR, 0.68 [95% CI, 0.57-0.82) but not for patients who were not receiving invasive mechanical ventilation (RR, 0.32 [95% CI, 0.05-2.02]). Toothbrushing for patients in the ICU was associated with fewer days of mechanical ventilation (mean difference, -1.24 [95% CI, -2.42 to -0.06] days) and a shorter ICU length of stay (mean difference, -1.78 [95% CI, -2.85 to -0.70] days). Brushing twice a day vs more frequent intervals was associated with similar effect estimates. Results were consistent in a sensitivity analysis restricted to 7 studies at low risk of bias (1367 patients). Non-ICU hospital length of stay and use of antibiotics were not associated with toothbrushing.

Conclusions

The findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis suggest that daily toothbrushing may be associated with significantly lower rates of HAP, particularly in patients receiving mechanical ventilation, lower rates of ICU mortality, shorter duration of mechanical ventilation, and shorter ICU length of stay. Policies and programs encouraging more widespread and consistent toothbrushing are warranted.

Assessment of Nursing Staff's Knowledge, Attitude and Practice Regarding Oral Hygiene Care in Intensive Care Unit Patients: A Multicenter Cross-sectional Study

Background

Oral care is one of the fundamental nursing care procedures used to decrease oral colonization, dental plaque, respiratory infections, patient stay, and cost. The importance of good oral hygiene for patients in intensive care units (ICUs) is well recognized, however, the most effective way to achieve good oral care in the ICU is unclear. Therefore, the aim of this study was to assess the knowledge, attitude, and practice of nursing professionals regarding oral healthcare in ICUs among various medical institutes across India.

Materials and methods

A questionnaire-based multicentric cross-sectional survey was conducted among registered nursing professionals employed at ICUs of three government tertiary healthcare centers (THC) of India: THC-I, THC-II, and THC-III located in the eastern and northern parts of India between February 2022 and July 2022.

Results

A total of 150 nurses completed the questionnaire form (response rate: 62.5%) comprised of 49 (32.7%) males and 101 (67.3%) females with a mean age of 35.69 ± 7.7 years. Nursing officers' knowledge surpassed that of staff nurses regarding the duration of toothbrushing (p = 0.033). Among interinstitutional comparisons, THC-I nurses showed the greatest knowledge regarding the duration of toothbrushing and the mechanism of preventing saliva accumulation to reduce microbial growth (p = 0.013 and p = 0.003, respectively). Based on total work experience, participants were segregated into three groups: Group I (<7 years), group II (7.1-13.9 years), and group III (>14 years). Group II surpassed the knowledge of denture removal during sleep, cleaning after every meal, and storing in personalized air-tight containers (p = 0.001 and p = 0.036, respectively). The majority from group II recommended plain saline as the material for oral hygiene maintenance in ICU patients (p = 0.008). Group III predominantly practiced the ideal handwashing technique pre- and post-patient contact which was statistically significant (p = 0.001).

Conclusion

This study observed that a knowledge gap exists among the nurses of the three institutes across India pertaining to the oral hygiene care of ICU patients. Nurse's education and implementation of the proper oral hygiene measures for intubated patients in ICU setup is an essential need.

How to cite this article

Kumar S, Singh B, Mahuli AV, Kumar S, Singh A, Jha AK. Assessment of Nursing Staff's Knowledge, Attitude and Practice Regarding Oral Hygiene Care in Intensive Care Unit Patients: A Multicenter Cross-sectional Study. Indian J Crit Care Med 2024;28(1):48-57.

Quantitative oral health assessments in mechanically ventilated patients: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

Oral health is a key contributor to a person's overall health. Previous studies indicate that oral health deteriorates throughout ventilation and may contribute to the development of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP). Oral health at the time of initial ventilation may impact on this deterioration.

AIMS

To determine the quantitative clinical assessment methods used to measure oral health and what is currently known regarding the oral health of patients at the time of initial ventilation.

STUDY DESIGN

A systematic literature search using electronic bibliographic databases MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library was undertaken for this scoping review. Studies were included if patients were >18 years old and mechanically ventilated for <48 h at the time of the first oral assessment.

RESULTS

In total, 12 studies were included. The review demonstrates a limited understanding of clinical oral health at the time of initial ventilation. Significant variation in both assessment methods and reporting of oral health makes comparison of results difficult resulting in a poor overall understanding of oral health at the time of intubation.

CONCLUSION

Standardized assessment and reporting methods may improve clinical application of findings and help direct future research. We suggest developing a core outcome set to ensure consistent use of assessment tools as well as standardized reporting of results.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

It is essential that a good understanding of oral health at the time of initial ventilation is gained so that patients receive more targeted oral hygiene intervention in ICU, potentially leading to improved patient outcomes.

Impact of oral care modalities on the incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia in the intensive care unit: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

At present, evidence of the role of oral hygiene in ICU-related pneumonia is rare. The study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of toothbrush-based oral care in preventing ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) in patients with mechanical ventilation in the ICU.

METHODS

Ten databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating toothbrush-based oral care for preventing VAP in patients with mechanical ventilation in ICU. Quality assessment and data extraction were independently performed by 2 researchers. The meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3 software.

RESULTS

Thirteen RCTs with 657 patients were included. Tooth brushing + 0.2%/0.12% chlorhexidine was associated with reduced incidence of VAP compared to chlorhexidine (OR = 0.63, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.43-0.91, P = .01) or tooth brushing + placebo (OR = 0.47, 95% CI: 0.25-0.86, P = .02) in patients with mechanical ventilation in ICU, but was similar to cotton wipe with 0.2% or 0.12% chlorhexidine (OR = 1.33, 95% CI: 0.77-2.29, P = .31).

CONCLUSIONS

Tooth brushing combined with chlorhexidine mouthwash can prevent VAP in patients with mechanical ventilation in ICU. There is no advantage of tooth brushing combined with chlorhexidine mouthwash over cotton wipe with chlorhexidine mouthwash for preventing VAP in these patients.

Oral health care for the critically ill: a narrative review

Background

The link between oral bacteria and respiratory infections is well documented. Dental plaque has the potential to be colonized by respiratory pathogens and this, together with microaspiration of oral bacteria, can lead to pneumonia particularly in the elderly and critically ill. The provision of adequate oral care is therefore essential for the maintenance of good oral health and the prevention of respiratory complications.

Main body

Numerous oral care practices are utilised for intubated patients, with a clear lack of consensus on the best approach for oral care. This narrative review aims to explore the oral-lung connection and discuss in detail current oral care practices to identify shortcomings and offer suggestions for future research. The importance of adequate oral care has been recognised in guideline interventions for the prevention of pneumonia, but practices differ and controversy exists particularly regarding the use of chlorhexidine. The oral health assessment is also an important but often overlooked element of oral care that needs to be considered. Oral care plans should ideally be implemented on the basis of an individual oral health assessment. An oral health assessment prior to provision of oral care should identify patient needs and facilitate targeted oral care interventions.

Conclusion

Oral health is an important consideration in the management of the critically ill. Studies have suggested benefit in the reduction of respiratory complication such as Ventilator Associated Pneumonia associated with effective oral health care practices. However, at present there is no consensus as to the best way of providing optimal oral health care in the critically ill. Further research is needed to standardise oral health assessment and care practices to enable development of evidenced based personalised oral care for the critically ill.

Hospital Dentistry for Intensive Care Unit Patients: A Comprehensive Review

This study aimed to review the oral hygiene status, oral care guidelines, and outcomes of oral care in intensive care unit (ICU) patients from a dental perspective for effective oral care. A literature search using the keywords "Hospital dentistry" OR "Oral care" OR "Intensive care unit" OR "Hospital inpatient" OR "Hospitalization" OR "Emergency service" AND "Oral health" OR "Oral hygiene" OR "Dental plaque" was conducted in PubMed, Medline, and Google Scholar to identify publications reporting on the oral care of the patients admitted to ICUs. A total of 17,400 articles were initially identified. Of these, 58 were selected and classified into three categories for critical review. Seven of these studies evaluated the oral status of ICU patients, and most of the studies indicated that ICU patients had poor oral hygiene or required active dental treatment. Thirty-three of these studies evaluated oral care methods for ICU patients, and in general, oral care methods using chlorhexidine as adjuncts along with tooth brushing were recommended. However, there were insufficient studies to evaluate oral hygiene through effective assessment tools from a dental perspective. In 36 studies on the outcomes of oral care in ICU patients, interventions by dental professionals showed effective results in preventing hospital-acquired infection. This review highlights the importance of establishing guidelines for the evaluation of oral status in ICU patients and summarizes data that may be useful for future studies. Further studies on maintaining good oral hygiene among ICU patients are needed.

Periodontopathogenic bacteria in subglottic samples from patients undergoing elective intubation for general anesthesia: A pilot study

BACKGROUND

Translocation of periodontal pathogens into the respiratory tract could either cause pneumonia or disrupt local defense mechanisms, predisposing the host to infection by respiratory pathogens. The objective of this pilot study was to evaluate the levels of periodontopathogenic bacteria in subglottic samples of intubated and mechanically ventilated patients and the impact of oral decontamination with chlorhexidine (CHX) on subglottic levels of these microorganisms.

METHODS

Patients scheduled to undergo elective surgical procedures requiring endotracheal intubation and mechanical ventilation for at least 3 hours were included. Following full-mouth periodontal examination, patients were randomly assigned to groups that rinsed preoperatively with 0.12% CHX or 0.9% saline (control). After 3 hours of orotracheal intubation, subglottic contents were collected. Quantification of Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans (A. actinomycetemcomitans), Porphyromonas gingivalis (P. gingivalis), and Tannerella forsythia (T. forsythia) in subglottic samples was determined using quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction. Data were analyzed by Fisher Exact Probability, unpaired Student's t and Mann-Whitney tests.

RESULTS

Of the 69 patients included, 43 completed study participation. There were no differences between control and CHX groups in subglottic detection rates and abundance levels of P. gingivalis (P = 0.59), T. forsythia (P = 0.83) and A. actinomycetemcomitans (P = 0.07). Moreover, our data indicate that periodontal health has no impact on subglottic levels of P. gingivalis, T. forsythia, and A. actinomycetemcomitans.

CONCLUSIONS

Periodontal pathogens were detected in subglottic samples of intubated and mechanically ventilated patients. Moreover, a single CHX rinse prior to endotracheal intubation may have no effect on subglottic contamination by P. gingivalis, T. forsythia, and A. actinomycetemcomitans.

Combination of toothbrushing and chlorhexidine compared with exclusive use of chlorhexidine to reduce the risk of ventilator-associated pneumonia: A systematic review with meta-analysis

This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of 0.12% chlorhexidine alone and 0.12% chlorhexidine in combination with toothbrushing to prevent ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) in mechanically ventilated patients. The Embase, Latin American and Caribbean Health Science Literature, PubMed, Scientific Electronic Library Online, Scopus, LIVIVO, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, OpenThesis, and Open Access Thesis and Dissertations databases were used. Only randomized controlled trials without restrictions on the year or language of publication were included. Two reviewers assessed the risk of bias using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Tool. A meta-analysis using a random-effects model estimated the combined relative risk (RR). The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations approach was used to assess the certainty of the evidence. Initially, 2,337 studies were identified, of which 4 were considered in the systematic review and 3 in the meta-analysis (total sample: 796 patients). The studies were published between 2009 and 2017. All eligible studies had a low risk of bias. The meta-analysis revealed that the risk of VAP was 24% lower in patients receiving chlorhexidine combined with toothbrushing than in those receiving chlorhexidine alone (RR: 0.76; 95% confidence interval: 0.55-1.06), with moderate certainty of evidence and without statistical significance. In conclusion, considering the limitations of this study, a standard protocol for the prevention of VAP is not yet recommended. More studies with larger sample sizes are needed to draw strong conclusions. However, considering that toothbrushing is a simple intervention, it should be a common practice in mechanically ventilated patients, especially among patients with coronavirus disease.

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

BACKGROUND

Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is defined as pneumonia developing in people who have received mechanical ventilation for at least 48 hours. VAP is a potentially serious complication in these patients who are already critically ill. Oral hygiene care (OHC), using either a mouthrinse, gel, swab, toothbrush, or combination, together with suction of secretions, may reduce the risk of VAP in these patients.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of oral hygiene care (OHC) on incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia in critically ill patients receiving mechanical ventilation in hospital intensive care units (ICUs).

SEARCH METHODS

Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched the following databases: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register (to 25 February 2020), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library, 2020, Issue 1), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 25 February 2020), Embase Ovid (1980 to 25 February 2020), LILACS BIREME Virtual Health Library (1982 to 25 February 2020) and CINAHL EBSCO (1937 to 25 February 2020). We also searched the VIP Database (January 2012 to 8 March 2020). The US National Institutes of Health Trials Registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched for ongoing trials. No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the effects of OHC (mouthrinse, gel, swab, toothbrush or combination) in critically ill patients receiving mechanical ventilation for at least 48 hours.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two review authors independently assessed search results, extracted data and assessed risk of bias in included studies. We contacted study authors for additional information. We reported risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous outcomes and mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes, using the random-effects model of meta-analysis when data from four or more trials were combined.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 40 RCTs (5675 participants), which were conducted in various countries including China, USA, Brazil and Iran. We categorised these RCTs into five main comparisons: chlorhexidine (CHX) mouthrinse or gel versus placebo/usual care; CHX mouthrinse versus other oral care agents; toothbrushing (± antiseptics) versus no toothbrushing (± antiseptics); powered versus manual toothbrushing; and comparisons of other oral care agents used in OHC (other oral care agents versus placebo/usual care, or head-to-head comparisons between other oral care agents). We assessed the overall risk of bias as high in 31 trials and low in two, with the rest being unclear. Moderate-certainty evidence from 13 RCTs (1206 participants, 92% adults) shows that CHX mouthrinse or gel, as part of OHC, probably reduces the incidence of VAP compared to placebo or usual care from 26% to about 18% (RR 0.67, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.47 to 0.97; P = 0.03; I2 = 66%). This is equivalent to a number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) of 12 (95% CI 7 to 128), i.e. providing OHC including CHX for 12 ventilated patients in intensive care would prevent one patient developing VAP. There was no evidence of a difference between interventions for the outcomes of mortality (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.33; P = 0.86, I2 = 0%; 9 RCTs, 944 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), duration of mechanical ventilation (MD -1.10 days, 95% CI -3.20 to 1.00 days; P = 0.30, I2 = 74%; 4 RCTs, 594 participants; very low-certainty evidence) or duration of intensive care unit (ICU) stay (MD -0.89 days, 95% CI -3.59 to 1.82 days; P = 0.52, I2 = 69%; 5 RCTs, 627 participants; low-certainty evidence). Most studies did not mention adverse effects. One study reported adverse effects, which were mild, with similar frequency in CHX and control groups and one study reported there were no adverse effects. Toothbrushing (± antiseptics) may reduce the incidence of VAP (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.91; P = 0.01, I2 = 40%; 5 RCTs, 910 participants; low-certainty evidence) compared to OHC without toothbrushing (± antiseptics). There is also some evidence that toothbrushing may reduce the duration of ICU stay (MD -1.89 days, 95% CI -3.52 to -0.27 days; P = 0.02, I2 = 0%; 3 RCTs, 749 participants), but this is very low certainty. Low-certainty evidence did not show a reduction in mortality (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.05; P = 0.12, I2 = 0%; 5 RCTs, 910 participants) or duration of mechanical ventilation (MD -0.43, 95% CI -1.17 to 0.30; P = 0.25, I2 = 46%; 4 RCTs, 810 participants).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Chlorhexidine mouthwash or gel, as part of OHC, probably reduces the incidence of developing ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) in critically ill patients from 26% to about 18%, when compared to placebo or usual care. We did not find a difference in mortality, duration of mechanical ventilation or duration of stay in the intensive care unit, although the evidence was low certainty. OHC including both antiseptics and toothbrushing may be more effective than OHC with antiseptics alone to reduce the incidence of VAP and the length of ICU stay, but, again, the evidence is low certainty. There is insufficient evidence to determine whether any of the interventions evaluated in the studies are associated with adverse effects.

The impact of tooth brushing versus tooth brushing and chlorhexidine application to avoid postoperative pneumonia in children

BACKGROUND

The pathogenesis of postsurgical pneumonia is a complicated and multifactorial process, in which elements like oral bacteria, orotracheal intubation, and dental hygiene play an important role. The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of 2 types of oral hygiene interventions in decreasing cases of postsurgical pneumonia.

METHODS

In pediatric patients scheduled for surgery, a quasi-experimental study was carried out over a 2-year period to evaluate the efficacy of 2 types of oral hygiene interventions. There were 2 groups of intervention with 1 group for comparison. Intervention groups were tooth brushing by a dentist (intervention group 1) and dental brushing by parents + chlorhexidine gluconate (intervention group 2). Data from the year with no oral hygiene interventions were used as the baseline group.

RESULTS

A total of 2,535 surgical procedures were followed. Baseline group incidence of postoperative pneumonia was 10 per 1,000 surgeries, 0.2 per 1,000 surgeries in the intervention group 1 (P = .04), and 0.8 per 1,000 surgeries in the intervention group 2. Intervention group 1 was protective against postoperative pneumonia (odds ratio, 0.06; P = .02; 95% confidence interval, 0.033-0.079), but there was no benefit with intervention group 2 (odds ratio, 0.87; P = .599; 95% confidence interval, 0.52-1.46).

CONCLUSIONS

Dental brushing performed before surgery by a pediatric dentist was effective in reducing the incidence of postoperative pneumonia in pediatric patients.

Efficacy of toothbrushing procedures performed in intensive care units in reducing the risk of ventilator-associated pneumonia: A systematic review

The aim of this systematic review (SR) was to assess whether toothbrushing-based oral heath measure (OHM), performed in intensive care units, can reduce the risk of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP). Dental biofilm removal has been considered important to prevent VAP. PUBMED, SCOPUS, WEB OF SCIENCE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases were searched up to and including December 2018 to identify randomized clinical trials (RCT) on the use of toothbrushing procedures in the prevention of VAP. Search was conducted by two independent reviewers. The risk of bias of each included study was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration's domain-based, two-part tool. Random effects meta-analyses were conducted thoroughly. Search strategy identified 215 potentially eligible articles, of which 12 RCT were included. All studies evidenced the importance of OHM in mechanically ventilated patients in order to prevent VAP. Seven RCT (58.3%) found some degree of positive association between toothbrushing, alone or associated to oral topical chlorhexidine (CHX), and a potential reduction of mechanical ventilation-related outcomes and dental biofilm/oral bacteria. However, pooled estimates did not identify an additional decrease of VAP incidence for any of the tested procedures (ie, toothbrushing + CHX versus swab/gauze cleaning + CHX or toothbrushing + CHX versus toothbrushing alone or + placebo). Toothbrushing does not seem to promote a reduction of VAP-outcomes compared to swab/gauze cleaning, when topic CHX is applied for oral hygiene of patients submitted to mechanical ventilation.

The Effectiveness of Oral Care Guideline Implementation on Oral Health Status in Critically Ill Patients

Intubated patients need specific oral care due to the use of endotracheal tubes. An oral nursing care guideline needs to be implemented to guide nurses in oral care in intubated patients. To test the effectiveness of oral nursing care guideline implementation. The Rogers' Diffusion of Innovations Theory was used to introduce an oral nursing care guideline to 28 nurses working in an intensive care unit in a hospital within 2 months, using mass and private communication within a hospital management system. The oral care guideline was introduced to 47 intubated patients. The accuracy of oral care practice was assessed by nurse research assistants, and patients' oral health status was examined by dental nurse research assistants. The accuracy of practice among nurses was found between 88% and 100%. Total 97.47% (n = 46) of patients had an acceptable oral health status after receiving oral care based on the oral nursing care guideline. The oral nursing care guideline was effectively implemented with high accuracy and could increase patient oral integrity after its implementation.

Comparative study of 2 oral care protocols in intensive care units

BACKGROUND

The quality of oral care is important in limiting the emergence of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) in intubated patients. Our main objective was to measure the quality improvement in oral care following the implementation of a new oral care protocol. We also monitored VAP rates.

MATERIAL/METHODS

This was a cohort study of patients in 5 adult ICUs covering different specialties. During period 1, caregivers used a foam stick for oral care and during period 2 a stick and tooth brushing with aspiration. Oral chlorhexidine was used during both periods. The caregivers rated improvement in oral health on the basis of 4 criteria (tongue, mucous membranes, gingivae, and teeth). Caregiver satisfaction was also assessed. The incidence of VAP was monitored.

RESULTS

A total of 2,030 intubated patients admitted to intensive care units benefited from oral care. The patient populations during the 2 periods were similar with regard to demographic data and VAP potential risk factors. Oral health was significantly better from the third day of oral care in period 2 onward (period 1, 6.4 ± 2.1; period 2, 5.6 ± 1.8; P = .043). Caregivers found the period 2 protocol easier to implement and more effective. VAP rates decreased significantly between the 2 periods (period 1, 12.8%; period 2, 8.5%; P = .002).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study showed that the implementation of a simple strategy improved the quality of oral care of patients in intensive care units, and decreased VAP rates.

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

BACKGROUND

Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is defined as pneumonia developing in people who have received mechanical ventilation for at least 48 hours. VAP is a potentially serious complication in these patients who are already critically ill. Oral hygiene care (OHC), using either a mouthrinse, gel, toothbrush, or combination, together with aspiration of secretions, may reduce the risk of VAP in these patients.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of oral hygiene care on incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia in critically ill patients receiving mechanical ventilation in hospital intensive care units (ICUs).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following electronic databases: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register (to 17 December 2015), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library, 2015, Issue 11), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 17 December 2015), Embase Ovid (1980 to 17 December 2015), LILACS BIREME Virtual Health Library (1982 to 17 December 2015), CINAHL EBSCO (1937 to 17 December 2016), Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (1978 to 14 January 2013), China National Knowledge Infrastructure (1994 to 14 January 2013), Wan Fang Database (January 1984 to 14 January 2013) and VIP Database (January 2012 to 4 May 2016). We searched ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for ongoing trials to 17 December 2015. We placed no restrictions on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the effects of OHC (mouthrinse, swab, toothbrush or combination) in critically ill patients receiving mechanical ventilation for at least 48 hours.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two review authors independently assessed search results, extracted data and assessed risk of bias in included studies. We contacted study authors for additional information. We pooled data from trials with similar interventions and outcomes. We reported risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous outcomes and mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes, using random-effects models unless there were fewer than four studies.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 38 RCTs (6016 participants). There were four main comparisons: chlorhexidine (CHX) mouthrinse or gel versus placebo/usual care; toothbrushing versus no toothbrushing; powered versus manual toothbrushing; and comparisons of oral care solutions. We assessed the overall risk of bias as low in five trials (13%), high in 26 trials (68%), and unclear in seven trials (18%). We did not consider the risk of bias to be serious when assessing the quality of evidence (GRADE) for VAP incidence, but we downgraded other outcomes for risk of bias.High quality evidence from 18 RCTs (2451 participants, 86% adults) shows that CHX mouthrinse or gel, as part of OHC, reduces the risk of VAP compared to placebo or usual care from 25% to about 19% (RR 0.74, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.61 to 0.89, P = 0.002, I2 = 31%). This is equivalent to a number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) of 17 (95% CI 10 to 33), which indicates that for every 17 ventilated patients in intensive care receiving OHC including chlorhexidine, one outcome of VAP would be prevented. There is no evidence of a difference between CHX and placebo/usual care for the outcomes of mortality (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.23, P = 0.18, I2 = 0%, 15 RCTs, 2163 participants, moderate quality evidence), duration of mechanical ventilation (MD -0.09 days, 95% CI -1.73 to 1.55 days, P = 0.91, I2 = 36%, five RCTs, 800 participants, low quality evidence), or duration of intensive care unit (ICU) stay (MD 0.21 days, 95% CI -1.48 to 1.89 days, P = 0.81, I2 = 9%, six RCTs, 833 participants, moderate quality evidence). There is insufficient evidence to determine the effect of CHX on duration of systemic antibiotics, oral health indices, caregivers' preferences or cost. Only two studies reported any adverse effects, and these were mild with similar frequency in CHX and control groups.We are uncertain as to the effects of toothbrushing (± antiseptics) on the outcomes of VAP (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.09, P = 0.11, I2 = 64%, five RCTs, 889 participants, very low quality evidence) and mortality (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.09, P = 0.24, I2 = 0%, five RCTs, 889 participants, low quality evidence) compared to OHC without toothbrushing (± antiseptics). There is insufficient evidence to determine whether toothbrushing affects duration of mechanical ventilation, duration of ICU stay, use of systemic antibiotics, oral health indices, adverse effects, caregivers' preferences or cost.Only one trial (78 participants) compared use of a powered toothbrush with a manual toothbrush, providing insufficient evidence to determine the effect on any of the outcomes of this review.Fifteen trials compared various other oral care solutions. There is very weak evidence that povidone iodine mouthrinse is more effective than saline/placebo (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.95, P = 0.02, I2 = 74%, three studies, 356 participants, high risk of bias), and that saline rinse is more effective than saline swab (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.62, P < 0.001, I2 = 84%, four studies, 488 participants, high risk of bias) in reducing VAP. Due to variation in comparisons and outcomes among trials, there is insufficient evidence concerning the effects of other oral care solutions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

OHC including chlorhexidine mouthwash or gel reduces the risk of developing ventilator-associated pneumonia in critically ill patients from 25% to about 19%. However, there is no evidence of a difference in the outcomes of mortality, duration of mechanical ventilation or duration of ICU stay. There is no evidence that OHC including both antiseptics and toothbrushing is different from OHC with antiseptics alone, and some weak evidence to suggest that povidone iodine mouthrinse is more effective than saline/placebo, and saline rinse is more effective than saline swab in reducing VAP. There is insufficient evidence to determine whether powered toothbrushing or other oral care solutions are effective in reducing VAP. There is also insufficient evidence to determine whether any of the interventions evaluated in the studies are associated with adverse effects.

Comparison of foam swabs and toothbrushes as oral hygiene interventions in mechanically ventilated patients: a randomised split mouth study

Introduction

During critical illness, dental plaque may serve as a reservoir of respiratory pathogens. This study compared the effectiveness of toothbrushing with a small-headed toothbrush or a foam-headed swab in mechanically ventilated patients.

Methods

This was a randomised, assessor-blinded, split-mouth trial, performed at a single critical care unit. Adult, orally intubated patients with >20 teeth, where >24 hours of mechanical ventilation was expected were included. Teeth were cleaned 12-hourly using a foam swab or toothbrush (each randomly assigned to one side of the mouth). Cleaning efficacy was based on plaque scores, gingival index and microbial plaque counts.

Results

High initial plaque (mean=2.1 (SD 0.45)) and gingival (mean=2.0 (SD 0.54)) scores were recorded for 21 patients. A significant reduction compared with initial plaque index occurred using both toothbrushes (mean change=−1.26, 95% CI −1.57 to −0.95; p<0.001) and foam swabs (mean change=−1.28, 95% CI −1.54 to −1.01; p<0.001). There was significant reduction in gingival index over time using toothbrushes (mean change=−0.92; 95% CI −1.19 to −0.64; p<0.001) and foam swabs (mean change=−0.85; 95% CI −1.10 to −0.61; p<0.001). Differences between cleaning methods were not statistically significant (p=0.12 for change in gingival index; p=0.24 for change in plaque index). There was no significant change in bacterial dental plaque counts between toothbrushing (mean change 3.7×10⁴ colony-forming units (CFUs); minimum to maximum (−2.5×10¹⁰ CFUs, 8.7×10⁷ CFUs)) and foam swabs (mean change 9×10⁴ CFUs; minimum to maximum (−3.1×10¹⁰ CFUs, 3.0×10⁷ CFUs)).

Conclusions

Patients admitted to adult intensive care had poor oral health, which improved after brushing with a toothbrush or foam swab. Both interventions were equally effective at removing plaque and reducing gingival inflammation.

Trial registration number

NCT01154257; Pre-results.

Strategies to Prevent Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia in Acute Care Hospitals: 2014 Update

Previously published guidelines are available that provide comprehensive recommendations for detecting and preventing healthcare-associated infections (HAIs). The intent of this document is to highlight practical recommendations in a concise format to assist acute care hospitals in implementing and prioritizing strategies to prevent ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) and other ventilator-associated events (VAEs) and to improve outcomes for mechanically ventilated adults, children, and neonates. This document updates "Strategies to Prevent Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia in Acute Care Hospitals," published in 2008. This expert guidance document is sponsored by the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America (SHEA) and is the product of a collaborative effort led by SHEA, the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA), the American Hospital Association (AHA), the Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology (APIC), and The Joint Commission, with major contributions from representatives of a number of organizations and societies with content expertise. The list of endorsing and supporting organizations is presented in the introduction to the 2014 updates.

Prevention of Healthcare-Associated Pneumonia with Oral Care in Individuals Without Mechanical Ventilation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

OBJECTIVE

Evidence is lacking on the preventive effect of oral care on healthcare-associated pneumonia in hospitalized patients and nursing home residents who are not mechanically ventilated. The primary aim of this review was to assess the effectiveness of oral care on the incidence of pneumonia in nonventilated patients.

METHODS

We searched 8 databases (MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, CINAHL, Web of Science, LILACS, ICHUSHI, and CiNii), in addition to trial registries and a manual search. Eligible studies were published and unpublished randomized controlled trials examining the effect of any method of oral care on reported incidence of pneumonia and/or fatal pneumonia. Relative risks (RR) and 95% confidence intervals were calculated. Risk of bias was assessed for eligible studies.

RESULTS

We identified 5 studies consisting of 1,009 subjects that met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 2 trials assessed the effect of chlorhexidine in hospitalized patients; 3 studies examined mechanical oral cleaning in nursing home residents. A meta-analysis could only be done on 4 trials; this analysis showed a significant risk reduction in pneumonia through oral care interventions (RRfixed, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.40–0.91; P=.02). The effects of mechanical oral care alone were significant when pooled across studies. (RRfixed, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.40–0.92; P=.02). Risk reduction for fatal pneumonia from mechanical oral cleaning was also significant (RRfixed, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.23–0.71; P=.002). Most studies had a high risk of bias.

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis suggests a preventive effect of oral care on pneumonia in nonventilated individuals. This effect, however, should be interpreted with caution due to risk of bias in the included trials.

Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2015;36(8): 899–906

Strategies to prevent ventilator-associated pneumonia in acute care hospitals: 2014 update

Previously published guidelines are available that provide comprehensive recommendations for detecting and preventing healthcare-associated infections (HAIs). The intent of this document is to highlight practical recommendations in a concise format to assist acute care hospitals in implementing and prioritizing strategies to prevent ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) and other ventilator-associated events (VAEs) and to improve outcomes for mechanically ventilated adults, children, and neonates. This document updates “Strategies to Prevent Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia in Acute Care Hospitals,” published in 2008. This expert guidance document is sponsored by the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America (SHEA) and is the product of a collaborative effort led by SHEA, the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA), the American Hospital Association (AHA), the Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology (APIC), and The Joint Commission, with major contributions from representatives of a number of organizations and societies with content expertise. The list of endorsing and supporting organizations is presented in the introduction to the 2014 updates.

Reducing ventilator associated pneumonia in adult patients through high standards of oral care: a historical control study

OBJECTIVES

Implement and evaluate the impact of oral hygiene measures (teeth brushing, 1% oral chlorhexidine and oropharyngeal suction) on the incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) and the costs of prevention and treatment.

DESIGN

A historical control study of all 1087 patients, mechanically ventilated for at least 48hours in a general adult critical care unit, between July 2009 and December 2011. The incidence of VAP in 528 patients before a practice change was compared with the incidence in 559 patients after a practice change. The clinical audit cycle was used to review compliance with existing standards and implement a regime of enhanced oral hygiene. The costs of changing the oral care regime and the treatment of VAP with antibiotics was calculated.

SETTING

22 bed combined intensive care and high dependency unit in England.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

(1) Compliance with standards for oral care. (2) The incidence of VAP before and after the change.

RESULTS

91% (95% CI 90-93%) compliance with the standards for oral care was achieved throughout the 30 months of the study with very little difference before (90%, 95% CI 88-93%) and after (92%, 95% CI 90-95%) the changes in oral care standards were introduced. Of 528 patients mechanically ventilated for at least 48 hours before the change, 47 developed VAP. The mean incidence of VAP was 0.09 (8.9%) (95% CI 0.07-0.12). The mean VAP per 1000 ventilator days was 13.6 (95% CI 13.1-14.0). After the change 24 of 559 patients developed VAP. The mean incidence of VAP after the change was 0.04 (4.1%) (95% CI 0.03-0.06). The mean VAP per 1000 ventilator days was 6.9 (95% CI 6.5-7.1). There was a £6319 ($10,112, €7518) cost saving on preventing and treating VAP following the practice change. A statistically significant difference (p<0.01) was seen between the incidence of VAP expected and that observed after the change in oral care. This represents a relative risk reduction of 0.53 (95% CI 0.25-0.71) and number needed to treat (NNT) of 21.

CONCLUSION

An enhanced oral care bundle, incorporating 1% Chlorhexidine Gluconate, was associated with a significant reduction in VAP and the costs of treating VAP. Limitations of the study relate to analysis of other variables, in particular severity of illness, between the two groups and the lack of agreement in the literature on VAP criteria, which limits generalisation of these findings.

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

BACKGROUND

Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is defined as pneumonia developing in persons who have received mechanical ventilation for at least 48 hours. VAP is a potentially serious complication in these patients who are already critically ill. Oral hygiene care (OHC), using either a mouthrinse, gel, toothbrush, or combination, together with aspiration of secretions may reduce the risk of VAP in these patients.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of OHC on the incidence of VAP in critically ill patients receiving mechanical ventilation in intensive care units (ICUs) in hospitals.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register (to 14 January 2013), CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 12), MEDLINE (OVID) (1946 to 14 January 2013), EMBASE (OVID) (1980 to 14 January 2013), LILACS (BIREME) (1982 to 14 January 2013), CINAHL (EBSCO) (1980 to 14 January 2013), Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (1978 to 14 January 2013), China National Knowledge Infrastructure (1994 to 14 January 2013), Wan Fang Database (January 1984 to 14 January 2013), OpenGrey and ClinicalTrials.gov (to 14 January 2013). There were no restrictions regarding language or date of publication.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the effects of OHC (mouthrinse, swab, toothbrush or combination) in critically ill patients receiving mechanical ventilation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed all search results, extracted data and undertook risk of bias. We contacted study authors for additional information. Trials with similar interventions and outcomes were pooled reporting odds ratios (OR) for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences (MD) for continuous outcomes using random-effects models unless there were fewer than four studies.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-five RCTs (5374 participants) were included. Five trials (14%) were assessed at low risk of bias, 17 studies (49%) were at high risk of bias, and 13 studies (37%) were assessed at unclear risk of bias in at least one domain. There were four main comparisons: chlorhexidine (CHX mouthrinse or gel) versus placebo/usual care, toothbrushing versus no toothbrushing, powered versus manual toothbrushing and comparisons of oral care solutions.There is moderate quality evidence from 17 RCTs (2402 participants, two at high, 11 at unclear and four at low risk of bias) that CHX mouthrinse or gel, as part of OHC, compared to placebo or usual care is associated with a reduction in VAP (OR 0.60, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.47 to 0.77, P < 0.001, I(2) = 21%). This is equivalent to a number needed to treat (NNT) of 15 (95% CI 10 to 34) indicating that for every 15 ventilated patients in intensive care receiving OHC including chlorhexidine, one outcome of VAP will be prevented. There is no evidence of a difference between CHX and placebo/usual care in the outcomes of mortality (OR 1.10, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.38, P = 0.44, I(2) = 2%, 15 RCTs, moderate quality evidence), duration of mechanical ventilation (MD 0.09, 95% CI -0.84 to 1.01 days, P = 0.85, I(2) = 24%, six RCTs, moderate quality evidence), or duration of ICU stay (MD -0.21, 95% CI -1.48 to 1.89 days, P = 0.81, I(2) = 9%, six RCTs, moderate quality evidence). There was insufficient evidence to determine whether there is a difference between CHX and placebo/usual care in the outcomes of duration of use of systemic antibiotics, oral health indices, microbiological cultures, caregivers preferences or cost. Only three studies reported any adverse effects, and these were mild with similar frequency in CHX and control groups.From three trials of children aged from 0 to 15 years (342 participants, moderate quality evidence) there is no evidence of a difference between OHC with CHX and placebo for the outcomes of VAP (OR 1.07, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.77, P = 0.79, I(2) = 0%), or mortality (OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.41 to 1.30, P = 0.28, I(2) = 0%), and insufficient evidence to determine the effect on the outcomes of duration of ventilation, duration of ICU stay, use of systemic antibiotics, plaque index, microbiological cultures or adverse effects, in children.Based on four RCTs (828 participants, low quality evidence) there is no evidence of a difference between OHC including toothbrushing (± CHX) compared to OHC without toothbrushing (± CHX) for the outcome of VAP (OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.29, P = 0.24 , I(2) = 64%) and no evidence of a difference for mortality (OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.16, P = 0.31, I(2) = 0%, four RCTs, moderate quality evidence). There is insufficient evidence to determine whether there is a difference due to toothbrushing for the outcomes of duration of mechanical ventilation, duration of ICU stay, use of systemic antibiotics, oral health indices, microbiological cultures, adverse effects, caregivers preferences or cost.Only one trial compared use of a powered toothbrush with a manual toothbrush providing insufficient evidence to determine the effect on any of the outcomes of this review.A range of other oral care solutions were compared. There is some weak evidence that povidone iodine mouthrinse is more effective than saline in reducing VAP (OR 0.35, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.65, P = 0.0009, I(2) = 53%) (two studies, 206 participants, high risk of bias). Due to the variation in comparisons and outcomes among the trials in this group there is insufficient evidence concerning the effects of other oral care solutions on the outcomes of this review.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Effective OHC is important for ventilated patients in intensive care. OHC that includes either chlorhexidine mouthwash or gel is associated with a 40% reduction in the odds of developing ventilator-associated pneumonia in critically ill adults. However, there is no evidence of a difference in the outcomes of mortality, duration of mechanical ventilation or duration of ICU stay. There is no evidence that OHC including both CHX and toothbrushing is different from OHC with CHX alone, and some weak evidence to suggest that povidone iodine mouthrinse is more effective than saline in reducing VAP. There is insufficient evidence to determine whether powered toothbrushing or other oral care solutions are effective in reducing VAP.

Toothbrushing for critically ill mechanically ventilated patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials evaluating ventilator-associated pneumonia

BACKGROUND

Oral care may decrease ventilator-associated pneumonia in the ICU. The objective of this review was to summarize and critically appraise randomized trials in mechanically ventilated patients in the ICU testing the effect of oral care strategies involving toothbrushing on ventilator-associated pneumonia.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched EMBASE, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register and Database of Systematic Reviews from 1980 until March 2012, independently and in duplicate, as well as personal files and reference lists. In duplicate, articles were selected if they were randomized trials, enrolled adult critically ill patients, compared any kind of oral care involving toothbrushing with any other kind of oral care or control with or without toothbrushing, and examined ventilator-associated pneumonia. In duplicate, we abstracted trial characteristics and quality using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. The results were combined using a random effects model.

RESULTS

We included six trials enrolling 1,408 patients, five of which compared toothbrushing to usual oral care and one of which compared electric with manual toothbrushing. In four trials, there was a trend toward lower ventilator-associated pneumonia rates (risk ratio, 0.77; 95% confidence interval, 0.50-1.21; p = 0.26). This trend was also observed in one trial reporting fewer cases of ventilator-associated pneumonia per 1,000 ventilator days (20.68 vs. 25.89; p = 0.53) in patients receiving toothbrushing vs. no toothbrushing. The only trial with low risk of bias suggested that toothbrushing significantly reduced ventilator-associated pneumonia (risk ratio, 0.26; 95% confidence interval, 0.10-0.67; p = 0.006). Use of chlorhexidine antisepsis seems to attenuate the effect of toothbrushing on ventilator-associated pneumonia (p for the interaction = 0.02). One trial comparing electric vs. manual toothbrushing showed no difference in ventilator-associated pneumonia rates (risk ratio, 0.96; 95% confidence interval, 0.47-1.96; p = 0.91). Toothbrushing did not impact on length of ICU stay, or ICU or hospital mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

In intubated, mechanically ventilated critically ill patients, toothbrushing did not significantly reduce the risk of ventilator-associated pneumonia overall. Toothbrushing has no effect on mortality or length of stay. Electric and manual toothbrushing seem to have similar effects. More research is needed on this aspect of oral care to evaluate its potential to decrease ventilator-associated pneumonia.

Mouth care for orally intubated patients: a critical ethnographic review of the nursing literature

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this critical ethnographic literature review was to explore the evolution of nursing discourse in oral hygiene for intubated and mechanically ventilated patients.

METHODS

The online databases CINAHL and MEDLINE were searched for nurse-authored English language articles published between 1960 and 2011 in peer-reviewed journals. Articles that did not discuss oral problems or related care for intubated adult patients were excluded. Articles that met the inclusion criteria were chronologically reviewed to trace changes in language and focus over time.

RESULTS

A total of 469 articles were identified, and 84 papers met all of the inclusion criteria. These articles presented an increasingly scientific and evaluative nursing discourse. Oral care originally focused on patient comfort within the literature; now it is emphasized as an infection control practice for the prevention of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP). Despite concern for its neglected application, the literature does not sufficiently address mouth care's practical accomplishment.

CONCLUSIONS

Mouth care for orally intubated patients is both a science and practice. However, the nursing literature now emphasises a scientific discourse of infection prevention. Inattention to the social and technical complexities of practice may inhibit how nurses learn, discuss and effectively perform this critical aspect of patient care.

Impact of oral care with versus without toothbrushing on the prevention of ventilator-associated pneumonia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

INTRODUCTION

Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) remains a common hazardous complication in mechanically ventilated patients and is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. We undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to assess the effect of toothbrushing as a component of oral care on the prevention of VAP in adult critically ill patients.

METHODS

A systematic literature search of PubMed and Embase (up to April 2012) was conducted. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials of mechanically ventilated adult patients receiving oral care with toothbrushing. Relative risks (RRs), weighted mean differences (WMDs), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated and heterogeneity was assessed with the I(2) test.

RESULTS

Four studies with a total of 828 patients met the inclusion criteria. Toothbrushing did not significantly reduce the incidence of VAP (RR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.50 to 1.21) and intensive care unit mortality (RR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.70 to 1.10). Toothbrushing was not associated with a statistically significant reduction in duration of mechanical ventilation (WMD, -0.88 days; 95% CI, -2.58 to 0.82), length of intensive care unit stay (WMD, -1.48 days; 95% CI, -3.40 to 0.45), antibiotic-free day (WMD, -0.52 days; 95% CI, -2.82 to 1.79), or mechanical ventilation-free day (WMD, -0.43 days; 95% CI, -1.23 to 0.36).

CONCLUSIONS

Oral care with toothbrushing versus without toothbrushing does not significantly reduce the incidence of VAP and alter other important clinical outcomes in mechanically ventilated patients. However, the results should be interpreted cautiously since relevant evidence is still limited, although accumulating. Further large-scale, well-designed randomized controlled trials are urgently needed.