4.5 Review

Nasal protection strategy reduces the incidence of nasal pressure injuries during nasotracheal intubation: Meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis

Journal

MEDICINE
Volume 101, Issue 40, Pages -

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000030638

Keywords

fixation of the tracheal tube; meta-analysis; nasal pressure injury; nasal protection strategy; protective dressing

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This article conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the effect of a nasal protection strategy on nasal pressure injury during nasotracheal intubation. The results showed that using a nasal protection strategy significantly reduced the incidence of nasal pressure injury.
Background: Nasal pressure injury is a serious problem during nasotracheal intubation. We performed this systematic review and meta-analysis to determine whether use of a nasal protection strategy (a protective dressing or a modified fixation method for the tracheal tube) reduces the incidence of nasal pressure injury during nasotracheal intubation. Methods: Literature searches were performed using three electronic databases. Data from each of the eligible trials were combined, and calculations were made using DerSimonian and Laird random effects models. The pooled effect estimates for nasal pressure injury were evaluated using the relative risk and 95% confidence interval, the Cochrane Q statistic, and the I-2 statistic. We also performed trial sequential analysis (TSA) to assess sensitivity to prevent type I error. We separated patients into subgroups to analyze the incidence of nasal pressure injury according to whether a protective dressing or a modified fixation method for the tracheal tube was used. Results: The literature search yielded five eligible trials. Meta-analysis of these trials showed that a nasal protection strategy significantly reduced the incidence of nasal pressure injury during nasotracheal intubation (relative risk (RR) 0.34; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.21-0.56; P < .0001; Cochrane's Q = 5.86, I-2 = 32%). The TSA boundary for futility could not be calculated because of an insufficient sample size. In subgroup analysis, both methods significantly reduced the incidence of nasal pressure injury during nasotracheal intubation. Conclusions: The findings of this meta-analysis suggest that a nasal protection strategy significantly reduces the incidence of nasal pressure injury during nasotracheal intubation. During nasotracheal intubation, the use of a protective dressing or modified fixation method for the tracheal tube can prevent to the incidence of nasal pressure injuries. However, the number of samples in our meta-analysis was too small for TSA and further studies are required.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available