Evidence Hub

Mechanical Insufflation-exsufflation for the Prevention of Ventilator-associated Pneumonia in Intensive Care Units: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Ryota Kuroiwa, Yoshihisa Tateishi, Taku Oshima, Takeshi Inagaki, Seiichiro Furukawa, R. Takemura, Yohei Kawasaki, Astushi Murata

Indian Journal of Critical Care Medicine, 2021

169 participants · 14 citations

Abstract

Abstract Aim Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is the most common intensive care unit (ICU)-acquired infection. The current study aimed to assess the efficacy of mechanical insufflation-exsufflation (MI-E) in preventing VAP in critically ill patients. Materials and methods This retrospective cohort study was conducted at the ICU of Chiba University Hospital between January 2014 and September 2017. The inclusion criteria were patients who required invasive mechanical ventilation ≥48 hours and those who underwent rehabilitation, including chest physical therapy (CPT). In 2015, the study institution started the use of MI-E in patients with impaired cough reflex. From January to December 2014, patients undergoing CPT were classified under the historical control group, and those who received treatment using MI-E from January 2015 to September 2017 were included in the intervention group. The patients received treatment using MI-E via the endotracheal or tracheostomy tube, with insufflation-exsufflation pressure of 15–40 cm H2O. The treatment frequency was one to three sessions daily, and a physical therapist who is experienced in using MI-E facilitated the treatment. Results From January 2015 to September 2017, 11 patients received treatment using MI-E. Of the 169 patients screened in 2014, 19 underwent CPT. The incidence of VAP was significantly different between the CPT and MI-E groups (84.2% [16/19] vs 26.4% [3/11], p = 0.011). After adjusting for covariates, a…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 169 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