Sole Mary Lou, Talbert Steven, Yan Xin, Penoyer Daleen, Mehta Devendra, Bennett Melody, Emery Kimberly Paige, Middleton Aurea, Deaton Lara, Abomoelak Bassam, Deb Chirajyoti
University of Central Florida College of Nursing, Orlando, Florida.
Center for Nursing Research and Advanced Nursing Practice, Orlando Health, Orlando, Florida.
J Adv Nurs. 2019 Nov;75(11):3045-3057. doi: 10.1111/jan.14142. Epub 2019 Aug 7.
To evaluate a deep oropharyngeal suction intervention (NO-ASPIRATE) in intubated patients on microaspiration, ventilator-associated events and clinical outcomes.
Prospective, two-group, single-blind, randomized clinical trial.
The study was conducted between 2014 - 2017 in 513 participants enroled within 24 hr of intubation and randomized into NO-ASPIRATE or usual care groups. Standard oral care was provided to all participants every 4 hr and deep oropharyngeal suctioning was added to the NO-ASPIRATE group. Oral and tracheal specimens were obtained to quantify α-amylase as an aspiration biomarker.
Data were analysed for 410 study completers enrolled at least 36 hr: NO-ASPIRATE (N = 206) and usual care (N = 204). Percent of tracheal specimens positive for α-amylase, mean tracheal α-amylase levels over time and ventilator-associated events were not different between groups. The NO-ASPIRATE group had a shorter hospital length of stay and a subgroup with moderate aspiration at baseline had significantly lower α-amylase levels across time.
Hospital length of stay was shorter in the NO-ASPIRATE group and a subgroup of intervention participants had lower α-amylase across time. Delivery of standardized oral care to all participants may have been an intervention itself and possibly associated with the lack of significant findings for most outcomes.
This trial compared usual care to oral care with a deep suctioning intervention on microaspiration and ventilator-associated events, as this has not been systematically studied. Further research on the usefulness of α-amylase as an aspiration biomarker and the role of oral suctioning, especially for certain populations, is indicated.
ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02284178.
评估深口咽吸引干预措施(不进行口咽吸引)对插管患者微量误吸、呼吸机相关事件及临床结局的影响。
前瞻性、两组、单盲、随机临床试验。
研究于2014年至2017年进行,共有513名在插管后24小时内入组的参与者,随机分为不进行口咽吸引组或常规护理组。所有参与者每4小时接受一次标准口腔护理,不进行口咽吸引组在此基础上增加深口咽吸引。获取口腔和气管标本以定量检测α-淀粉酶作为误吸生物标志物。
对至少36小时入组的410名研究完成者的数据进行了分析:不进行口咽吸引组(N = 206)和常规护理组(N = 204)。两组间气管标本中α-淀粉酶阳性百分比、随时间变化的气管α-淀粉酶平均水平及呼吸机相关事件并无差异。不进行口咽吸引组住院时间较短,且基线时有中度误吸的亚组随时间推移α-淀粉酶水平显著较低。
不进行口咽吸引组住院时间较短,且干预参与者中的一个亚组随时间推移α-淀粉酶水平较低。对所有参与者提供标准化口腔护理本身可能就是一种干预措施,且可能与大多数结局缺乏显著结果有关。
本试验将常规护理与采用深吸引干预措施的口腔护理在微量误吸和呼吸机相关事件方面进行了比较,因为此前尚未对此进行系统研究。有必要进一步研究α-淀粉酶作为误吸生物标志物的效用以及口咽吸引的作用,尤其是对某些人群的作用。
ClinicalTrials.gov:NCT02284178。