Effect of 0.12% Chlorhexidine Use for Oral Care on Ventilator-Associated Respiratory Infections: A Randomized Controlled Trial

The positive effects of preoperative chlorhexidine rinse to reduce postoperative pneumonia after kidney transplantation surgery

BACKGROUND

Postoperative pneumonia is one of the most observed hospital-acquired infections and increases the postoperative mortality rate. Further, it drives the healthcare systems under a severe financial burden. Preventing postoperative pneumonia is an incredibly challenging issue for clinicians. Since immunosuppression therapy, the patients who had kidney transplants are more vulnerable to postoperative infections. There is no data in the scientific literature focusing on the effects of preoperative oral care with chlorhexidine antiseptic solutions on postoperative pneumonia in kidney transplantation surgery cases. In the present research, we studied this topic.

METHODS

A prospective, randomized clinical trial was conducted at our institution between August 2020 and August 2022. Group A: Received 0.12 % chlorhexidine oral rinse preoperatively; Group B: Not received 0.12 % chlorhexidine oral rinse preoperatively. We analyzed the differences between the two trial groups using a chi-square or t-test. The Mann-Whitney U test was used for the categorical data.

RESULTS

Nine patients (17.6 %) were diagnosed with postoperative pneumonia in Group A and fourteen (25.9 %) in Group B (p < 0.05). Hospitalization time of Group B was prolonged (p < 0.05). In multivariate analysis, significant risk factors associated with postoperative pneumonia were advanced age, diabetes mellitus, smoking, delayed graft function and not gargling with 0.12 % chlorhexidine (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

To reduce postoperative pneumonia risk in patients undergoing kidney transplantation surgery, an oral health protocol including 0.12 % chlorhexidine mouth rinse seems beneficial.

A Review of Chlorhexidine Oral Care in Patients Receiving Mechanical Ventilation

BACKGROUND

Chlorhexidine gluconate has been considered the criterion standard of oral care for patients receiving mechanical ventilation because of its ability to reduce the incidence of ventilator-associated events. Optimal concentrations and frequencies remain unclear, as do adverse events related to mortality in various intensive care unit populations.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the current evidence for the efficacy of chlorhexidine gluconate in reducing the incidence of ventilator-associated events, mortality, intensive care unit length of stay, and duration of mechanical ventilation in patients receiving ventilator support.

METHODS

In this integrative review, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), MEDLINE, and Health Source: Nursing/Academic Edition were searched using terms related to mechanical ventilation and chlorhexidine gluconate oral care with dates ranging from 2012 to 2023.

RESULTS

Seventeen articles were included in this review: 8 systematic reviews, 8 randomized clinical trials (3 of which were not included in any systematic review), and 1 quasi-experimental study. Chlorhexidine gluconate oral care was associated with a reduced incidence of ventilator-associated events, but efficacy depended on concentration and frequency of administration. With stratification by intensive care unit population type, a nonsignificant trend toward increased mortality was found among non-cardiac surgical patients who received this care.

CONCLUSION

The evidence regarding the efficacy of chlorhexidine gluconate oral care in reducing ventilator-associated events in specific intensive care unit populations is contradictory. Recently published guidelines recommend de-implementation of chlorhexidine gluconate oral care in all patients receiving mechanical ventilation. Such care may be beneficial only in the cardiac surgical population.

Suction circuit flushing with chlorhexidine decreases ventilator-associated pneumonia: a quasi-experimental study

Background

Endotracheal suctioning of mechanically ventilated patients differs across the world. In many low and middle-income countries, endotracheal suctioning is often performed with a sterile suctioning catheter that is used for 12 h or during the length of one nursing shift. The effect of flushing multiple used endotracheal suction system with chlorhexidine after suctioning to reduce ventilator associated pneumonia (VAP) remains unclear.

Aim

The aim of the study is to assess the effectiveness of flushing multiple-used open endotracheal suction catheters and suctioning system with chlorhexidine gluconate 0.2% to reduce VAP in mechanically ventilated patients in a resource-limited Intensive Care Unit (ICU).

Methods

Due to the difficulty of blinding the intervention for nurses who perform endo-tracheal suction procedures, we adopted a quasi-experimental method with a randomized controlled trial design. A sample of 136 ICU patients were allocated to the intervention (n = 68) or control group (n = 68) between May and November 2020. The intervention was flushing the multiple-used suction catheter and suction system with 40ml chlorhexidine gluconate 0.2% and in the control group we used normal saline to flush the catheter and suction system. The primary outcome was incidence of VAP and the cost of the flushing solutions was the secondary outcome measure.

Results

Patients in the intervention group had a lower incidence of VAP compared to patients in the control group; 15 (22.1%) vs 29 (42.6%), p = 0.01. The incidence of late-onset VAP was 26.2% in the intervention group and 49% in the control group (p = 0.026) and the early-onset VAP was 13.2% in the intervention group and 25% in the control group (p = 0.081). Chlorhexidine gluconate 0.2% reduced the cost of suction system flushing (median: 78.4 vs 300 EGP, p < 0.001).

Conclusion

Using chlorhexidine gluconate 0.2% to flush multiple-used suctioning catheters after every endo-tracheal suction procedure might reduce the incidence of VAP in mechanically ventilated patients. Chlorhexidine gluconate 0.2% can be a cost-effective solution for flushing the suction circuit. Nurses working in resource-limited ICUs and using suctioning catheters multiple times might consider using chlorhexidine gluconate 0.2% instead of normal saline or distilled water when flushing the suction system.

Clinical trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT05206721.

Does chlorhexidine reduce the incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia in ICU patients? A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to investigate chlorhexidine's efficacy in preventing ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP).

DESIGN

A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses.

SETTINGS

The data were obtained from Pubmed, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE.

PATIENTS OR PARTICIPANTS

Only mechanically ventilated patients for at least 48h were included.

INTERVENTIONS

Randomized clinical trials applying any dosage form of chlorhexidine were eligible.

MAIN VARIABLES OF INTEREST

The relative risk (RR) of the VAP incidence and all-cause mortality was assessed using the random-effects model. The mean difference in days of mechanical ventilation duration and intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay were also appraised.

RESULTS

Ten studies involving 1233 patients were included in the meta-analysis. The oral application of CHX reduced the incidence of VAP (RR, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.55, 0.97]) and did not show an increase in all-cause mortality (RR, 1.13 [95% CI, 0.96, 1.32]).

CONCLUSIONS

CHX proved effective to prevent VAP. However, a conclusion on mortality rates could not be drawn because the quality of the evidence was very low for this outcome.

Anti-Inflammatory and Anti-Bacterial Effects of Mouthwashes in Intensive Care Units: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Mouthwashes are used as oral care for critical care patients to prevent infections. However, there are conflicting data concerning whether mouthwashes are needed as a part of daily oral care for critical care patients. This study aimed to evaluate the anti-inflammatory and anti-bacterial effects of mouthwashes for critical care patients. The PubMed, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and grey literature databases were searched by descriptors combining population (intensive care unit patients) and intervention (mouthwashes). After the screening, only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the anti-inflammatory and anti-bacterial effects of mouthwashes in patient critical care were included. From the 1531 articles, 16 RCTs satisfied the eligibility criteria for systematic review and 10 were included in the meta-analyses. A significant difference was found in the incidence of ventilator associated pneumonia (VAP) (odds ratio [OR] 0.53, 95% confidential interval [95% CI] 0.33 to 0.86) between the mouthwash and placebo groups, while no significant difference was found in the mortality (OR 1.49, 95%CI 0.92 to 2.40); the duration of mechanical ventilation (weighted mean difference [WMD] -0.10, 95%CI -2.01 to 1.81); and the colonization of Staphylococcus aureus (OR 0.88, 95%CI 0.34 to 2.30), Escherichia coli (OR 1.19, 95%CI 0.50 to 2.82), and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (OR 1.16, 95%CI 0.27 to 4.91) between the two groups. In conclusion, mouthwashes were effective in decreasing the incidence of VAP. Thus, mouthwashes can be used as part of daily oral care for critical care patients.

Effect of 0.12% Chlorhexidine Oral Rinse on Preventing Hospital-Acquired Pneumonia in Nonventilator Inpatients

BACKGROUND

Nonventilator hospital-associated pneumonia (NV-HAP) is a nosocomial infection with a multifactorial etiology that is particularly prevalent in individuals with poor oral health.

PURPOSE

This study was designed to determine the effect of a 0.12% chlorhexidine gluconate oral rinse intervention on oral health and on reducing NV-HAP in inpatients.

METHODS

A randomized, double-blind, and triple-arm clinical trial was conducted on a sample of 103 patients aged ≥ 50 years. Using the blocking sample method, patients were randomly assigned into three groups. These included Group A, using an oral rinse solution of 0.12% chlorhexidine; Group B, using Listerine; and Group C, using a standard saline oral rinse. In addition to routine hospital-associated pneumonia preventative nursing care, the participants used the oral rinse solutions twice a day with a period of at least 9 hours between each use. Oral health, the degree of bacterial exposure, and the clinical pneumonia index scale were evaluated in each of the groups at baseline (first day), on Intervention Days 3 and 7, and at discharge. The clearance rate was calculated by dividing the number of bacteria cleared by the total frequency of oral bacteria in the collected culture × 100%.

RESULTS

Each arm of the study was composed of 34-35 participants, with an average hospitalization duration of 7.5 days. There was no incidence of NV-HAP or any changes in clinical pulmonary infection score among the three groups. Group A achieved a more significant improvement in oral health assessment tool scores between baseline and discharge than either Group B or C ( p = .03), particularly in the tongue, gums, and tissues; saliva; and oral cleanliness subscales. In addition, Group A reported higher clearance rates for Staphylococcus (100.00% vs. 66.67% vs. 66.67%, respectively), Escherichia coli (100.00% vs. 60.00% vs. 66.67%, respectively), and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (75.00% vs. 46.30% vs. 25.00%, respectively) than Groups B and C.

CONCLUSIONS/IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Although the results do not provide evidence supporting the use of a 0.12% chlorhexidine oral rinse as better in terms of preventing NV-HAP in middle-aged and elderly inpatients, nursing supervision was found to have an overall positive effect on oral health. The use of oral rinse with 0.12% chlorhexidine for nonventilated patients with poor oral health may be recommended.