Guo Kangle, Shang Xue, Zhang Yinghua, Li Xiuxia, Yang Kehu, Wang Yan
Department of Infection Management, Gansu Provincial Hospital, Lanzhou, China.
School of Sociology, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Int J Nurs Stud. 2025 Aug;168:105099. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2025.105099. Epub 2025 Apr 27.
To investigate the effect of different frequencies of ventilator circuit changes on the occurrence of ventilation-associated pneumonia using network meta-analysis.
Chinese and English databases were systematically searched to collect eligible studies on the relationship between ventilator circuit changes and ventilation-associated pneumonia. The incidence of pneumonia for each change frequency was pooled using R software, and network meta-analysis was performed using Stata software to determine the optimal change frequency.
A total of 23 studies were included, including nine ventilator circuit changes with different frequencies. The meta-analysis showed that the combined incidence of pneumonia was 25 %. Network meta-analysis showed 3-day circuit changes significantly reduced ventilation-associated pneumonia incidence compared with 1 day (odds ratio (OR) = 0.26, 95 % confidence interval (CI) [0.10, 0.69]), 2 days (OR = 0.41, 95 % CI [0.20, 0.87]), 4 days (OR = 0.17, 95 % CI [0.04, 0.72]), and 14 days (OR = 0.11, 95 % CI [0.02, 0.50]). Direct meta-analysis showed no significant difference in 3-day circuit changes versus 1 day, 3-day circuit changes versus 14 days, and 7-day circuit changes versus 14 days. The probability ranking indicated that a 3-day frequency of ventilator circuit changes had the greatest probability of being the optimal intervention, followed by 5 days and 7 days.
The meta-analysis showed that ventilator circuit changes every 3 days had the best effect, but once a week also showed a positive preventive effect, with no significant effect on ventilation-associated pneumonia occurrence. These findings combined with existing evidence indicate that high frequency changes in the ventilator circuit should be avoided.
采用网状Meta分析探讨不同频率更换呼吸机管路对呼吸机相关性肺炎发生情况的影响。
系统检索中英文数据库,收集关于呼吸机管路更换与呼吸机相关性肺炎关系的合格研究。使用R软件汇总各更换频率下的肺炎发生率,并使用Stata软件进行网状Meta分析以确定最佳更换频率。
共纳入23项研究,包括9种不同频率的呼吸机管路更换。Meta分析显示肺炎合并发生率为25%。网状Meta分析表明,与1天更换相比,3天更换显著降低了呼吸机相关性肺炎的发生率(比值比(OR)=0.26,95%置信区间(CI)[0.10, 0.69]),与2天更换相比(OR=0.41,95%CI[0.20, 0.87]),与4天更换相比(OR=0.17,95%CI[0.04, 0.72]),与14天更换相比(OR=0.11,95%CI[0.02, 0.50])。直接Meta分析显示,3天更换与1天更换、3天更换与14天更换、7天更换与14天更换之间无显著差异。概率排序表明,3天的呼吸机管路更换频率最有可能是最佳干预措施,其次是5天和7天。
Meta分析表明,每3天更换一次呼吸机管路效果最佳,但每周更换一次也显示出积极的预防效果,对呼吸机相关性肺炎的发生无显著影响。这些发现与现有证据表明应避免频繁更换呼吸机管路。