No abstract

BACKGROUND: This meta-analysis aimed to explore the chlorhexidine-related mortality rate for subjects on mechanical ventilation and in an ICU when compared with subjects who received standard ICU care. METHODS: We searched a number of medical literature databases and the first 100 results in an internet search. Two of us independently reviewed the titles and abstracts of the identified articles. Then general and specific characteristics from eligible articles were extracted and the quality of included trials were appraised by using a risk of bias assessment tool. Risk ratios were calculated, together with the 95% CI. Random-effects models with the Mantel-Haenszel method were used to estimate pooled probabilities. Heterogeneity was identified and quantified via the chi square test and I 2 values, respectively. RESULTS: Eleven of the 547 studies were suitable for this meta-analysis. The included participants were critically ill adults in ICU settings of highincome countries (n ‫؍‬ 1157) and low/ middle-income countries (n ‫؍‬ 612). They were assigned to either the chlorhexidine or control groups. Overall, moderate-quality evidence indicated reduced ventilator-associated pneumonia incidence (for high-income countries: RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.41-0.87; P ‫؍‬ .008; I 2 ‫؍‬ 39%; and for low-and middle-income countries: RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.51-0.99; P ‫؍‬ .05; I 2 ‫؍‬ 10%), without a substantial effect on mortality rate (for high-income countries: RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.65-1.57; P ‫؍‬ .96; I 2 ‫؍‬ 42%; and for low-and middle-income countries: RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.96-1.29; P ‫؍‬ .17; I 2 ‫؍‬ 0%). CONCLUSIONS: The prophylactic administration of chlorhexidine among patients who were critically ill and in an ICU setting reduced the occurrence of ventilator-associated pneumonia with no significant impact on associated mortality.

No abstract

No abstract

Decreasing orthodontic treatment duration is at the forefront of innovation for clinical orthodontics. This network meta‐analysis aimed to determine the relative efficacy and safety of treatments for accelerated orthodontic tooth movement (OTM) in patients undergoing extraction of maxillary first premolars followed by canine retraction in any orthodontic setting. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, CINAHL and SCOPUS were searched (from inception to 20 April 2020). Study selection and data extraction were performed in duplicate. Eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were meta‐analysed to estimate the rate of tooth movement, 95% credible interval and surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) in the first 3 months following the application of the adjunctive accelerative method. Eligible RCTs were assessed by Cochrane risk of bias tool, and quality of evidence was assessed by GRADE approach, obtained from CINeMA web application. Interventions were ranked for efficacy and reviewed for safety. Nineteen studies pertaining to eight interventions, with data from 415 patients were included. Quality of evidence was very low to moderate. Very low‐to low‐quality evidence suggests that corticotomy is an efficacious and safe adjunctive treatment to accelerate OTM in comparison with conventional treatment in the first 2 months of treatment. Low‐quality evidence suggests that piezocision and micro‐osteoperforations (MOP) are efficacious and safe adjunctive treatments only in the first month of treatment. Frequent MOP in conjunction with low‐level laser therapy appeared to be an efficacious and safe adjunctive treatment only in the first month following its initial application but not thereafter.