Servicios Personalizados
Revista
Articulo
Indicadores
- Citado por SciELO
- Accesos
Links relacionados
- Citado por Google
- Similares en SciELO
- Similares en Google
Compartir
Colombia Médica
versión On-line ISSN 1657-9534
Resumen
LEMA-ZULUAGA, Gloria Lucía; FERNANDEZ-LAVERDE, Mauricio; CORREA-VARELA, Ana Marverin y ZULETA-TOBON, John J.. As-needed endotracheal suctioning protocol vs a routine endotracheal suctioning in Pediatric Intensive Care Unit: A randomized controlled trial. Colomb. Med. [online]. 2018, vol.49, n.2, pp.148-153. ISSN 1657-9534. https://doi.org/10.25100/cm.v49i2.2273.
Objective:
To compare two endotracheal suctioning protocols according to morbidity, days of mechanical ventilation, length of stay in the Pediatric Intensive Care Unit (PICU), incidence of Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia (VAP) and mortality.
Methods:
A Pragmatic randomized controlled trial performed at University Hospital Pablo Tobón Uribe, Medellin-Colombia. Forty-five children underwent an as-needed endotracheal suctioning protocol and forty five underwent a routine endotracheal suctioning protocol. Composite primary end point was the presence of hypoxemia, arrhythmias, accidental extubation and heart arrest. A logistic function trough generalized estimating equations (GEE) were used to calculate the Relative Risk for the main outcome.
Results:
Characteristics of patients were similar between groups. The composite primary end point was found in 22 (47%) of intervention group and 25 (55%) children of control group (RR= 0.84; 95% CI: 0.56-1.25), as well in 35 (5.8%) of 606 endotracheal suctioning performed to intervention group and 48 (7.4%) of 649 performed to control group (OR= 0.80; 95% CI: 0.5-1.3).
Conclusions:
There were no differences between an as-needed and a routine endotracheal suctioning protocol.
Trial registration:
ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01069185
Palabras clave : Suction; Intubation; endotraqueal; adverse effects; pediatric; randomized controlled trial; arrhythmias, cardiac; hypoxia.