Nosocomial pneumonia in mechanically ventilated patients, a prospective randomised evaluation of the Stericath closed suctioning system

111Citations
Citations of this article
98Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Objective: To compare the ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) incidence rates in mechanically ventilated patients according to the type of endotracheal suctioning (closed versus open). Setting: The Neurosurgery Intensive Care Unit of the Grenoble University Hospital, France. Design: A prospective randomised study performed after a 6-month period of nursing personnel training. Patients: One hundred four consecutive patients needing mechanical ventilation for more than 48 h were randomised into two groups. To be eligible, patients had to have no active infection or respiratory affection in their passes. In the Stericath group (S +, n = 54), patients were not disconnected from the ventilator during suctioning. The others were routinely managed (S-, n = 50). In both groups patterns of frequency and duration of suctioning were performed according to a standardised protocol. Measurements: The non-adjusted incidence rate of VAP was lower for S + than for S- (7.32 versus 15.89 per 1000 patient-days, p = 0.07). Multi-variate analysis performed using the Cox model showed an adjusted risk of VAP 3.5 times higher in S-(95%Cl: 11.00-12.33). The risk being 4.3 higher in patients receiving gastric acid secretion inhibitors (1.08-16.82). In non-censored cases (n = 76) length of ICU stay increased by an average of 16.8 days when VAP was present (p = 0.0008). No adverse effect due to Stericath use was noted and volume of tracheal aspirate was similar between groups (p = 0.178). Conclusion: The use of Stericath reduced the incidence rate of VAP without demonstrating any adverse effect.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Combes, P., Fauvage, B., & Oleyer, C. (2000). Nosocomial pneumonia in mechanically ventilated patients, a prospective randomised evaluation of the Stericath closed suctioning system. Intensive Care Medicine, 26(7), 878–882. https://doi.org/10.1007/s001340051276

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free