Evidence Hub

Risk factors and outcomes of ventilator-associated pneumonia in patients with traumatic brain injury: A systematic review and meta-analysis

D. Prieto-Alvarado, H. M. Parada-Gereda, D. Molano, Y. Martínez, Giovanna Patricia Rivas Tafurt, J. Masclans

Journal of critical care, 2024

2,883 participants · 16 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is a common complication in traumatic brain injury (TBI) patients, which increases morbidity and negatively affects outcomes. Risk factors and outcomes in these patients remain controversial. The aim of the present study is to explore the risk factors and clinical outcomes of patients with VAP and TBI.

METHODS

Two researchers conducted independent systematic literature searches of Pubmed, Cochrane Database, Scopus, Medline Ovid, Science Direct databases, published from inception to January 2024. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used to assess study quality. A meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model when heterogeneity I2 > 50 % and a fixed-effects model when I2 < 50 %; in addition, a subgroup analysis was performed to explore VAP risk factors, and publication bias was assessed with the funnel plot and Begg's and Egger's tests. All results were considered statistically significant when p < 0.05. The certainty of the evidence was evaluated using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) methodology.

RESULTS

Twelve studies were included in the meta-analysis with a total of 2883 patients. Male gender [OR 1.58 (95 % CI 1.23, 2.02) p < 0.05 I2 0 %] and abbreviated injury scale (head: H-AIS) [≥ 3 OR 2.79 (95 % CI 1.58, 4.93) p < 0.05 I2 0 %] increased the risk of VAP. After subgroup analysis, blood transfusion on admission [OR 1.97 (95 % CI 1.16-3.35) p ≤0.05 I2 5 %] and barbiturate…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 2,883 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free