Evidence Hub

Efficacy of preventive interventions against ventilator-associated pneumonia in critically ill patients: An umbrella review of meta-analyses

Dongwei Zhu, Qi Zhao, Shenhao Guo, Le Bai, Shuang Yang, Yisheng Zhao, Yong Xu, Xianmei Zhou

Journal of Hospital Infection, 2024

12 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Many meta-analyses have assessed the efficacy of preventive interventions against ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) in critically ill patients. However, there has been no comprehensive analysis of the strength and quality of evidence to date.

METHODS

Systematic reviews of randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials, which evaluated the effect of preventive strategies on the incidence of VAP in critically ill patients receiving mechanical ventilation for at least 48 h, were enrolled in this article.

RESULTS

We identified a sum of 34 interventions derived from 31 studies. Among these interventions, 19 resulted in a significantly reduced incidence of VAP. Among numerous strategies, only selective decontamination of the digestive tract (SDD) was supported by highly suggestive (class II) evidence (risk ratio [RR] = 0.439, 95% CI: 0.362, 0.532). Based on data from the sensitivity analysis, the evidence for the efficacy of non-invasive ventilation in weaning from mechanical ventilation (NIV) was upgraded from weak (class IV) to highly suggestive (class II) (RR = 0.32, 95% CI: 0.22, 0.46). All preventive interventions were not supported by robust evidence for reducing mortality. Early mobilization (EM) exhibited suggestive (class III) evidence in shortening both intensive length of stay (LOS) in the intensive care unit (ICU) (mean difference [MD] = -0.85, 95% CI: -1.21, -0.49) and duration of mechanical ventilation (MV) (MD = -1.02, 95% CI: -1.41, -0.63).…

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.

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