Incidence and risk factors for nasoenteral tube-related mechanical complications in a double cohort / Incidencia y factores de riesgo de complicaciones mecánicas relacionadas con la sonda nasoenteral en una doble cohorte

Introduction: nasoenteral tube-related mechanical complications are feared and little is known about their incidence and the risk factors associated with them. Objective: to evaluate the incidence of nasoenteral tube-related mechanical complications and the risk factors associated with them. Methods: a prospective double cohort of adult patients who used nasoenteral tube and were inpatients in nursing wards at a Brazilian high-complexity hospital. Data were collected daily. Cox regression and Generalized Estimating Equations were applied in the statistical analysis. Results: the sample was 494 patients, or 3,676 patient days. Traction (33 %) and obstruction (3.4 %) were frequent. Inadequate positioning of the distal end of the device and bleeding in the nasal mucosa occurred once each (0.2 %). There was no bronchoaspiration. Traction was associated with a history of stroke (HR: 1.69; 95 % CI: 1.09 to 2.64; p = 0.020), a higher score on the Glasgow Coma Scale (RR: 1.09; 95 % CI: 1.03 to 1.15; p = 0.002), and older age (RR: 1.02; 95 % CI: 1.00 to 1.04; p = 0.049). Being admitted to hospital already with the tube on (HR: 3.56; 95 % CI: 1.31 to 9.66; p = 0.013) and having opioids administered in the form of pills (RR: 6.09; 95 % CI: 1.37 to 27.2; p = 0.018) were risk factors for obstruction. Conclusion: traction or removal and obstruction of the device were frequent. A history of stroke, higher score on the Glasgow Coma Scale, and older age were risk factors for traction, whereas obstruction was more common in patients who already had the tube on at admission to the nursing ward, and who had opioids in the form of pills administered via the tube (AU)

Introducción: las complicaciones mecánicas relacionadas con el uso de la sonda nasoenteral son motivo de preocupación, pero se conoce poco sobre su incidencia y factores asociados. Objetivo: evaluar la incidencia y los factores de riesgo de complicaciones mecánicas relacionadas con el uso de la sonda nasoenteral. Métodos: doble cohorte prospectiva de pacientes adultos usuarios de sonda nasoenteral, ingresados en un hospital brasileño de alta complejidad. Se recogieron datos durante todos los días de su ingreso. Se emplearon la regresión de Cox y ecuaciones de estimación generalizada (GEE) para el análisis estadístico. Resultados: se siguió a 494 pacientes o 3676 pacientes-días. El desplazamiento accidental (33 %) y la obstrucción (3,4 %) fueron frecuentes. Hubo solo un caso de posicionamiento incorrecto del extremo distal y otro de sangrado de la mucosa nasal (0,2 %). No se observó broncoaspiración. El desplazamiento se asoció a historial de accidente cerebrovascular (HR: 1,69; IC 95 %: 1,09 a 2,64; p = 0,020), el mayor puntaje en la escala de coma de Glasgow (RR: 1,09; IC 95 %: 1,03 a 1,15; p = 0,002) y la mayor edad (RR: 1,02; IC 95 %: 1,00 a 1,04; p = 0,049). Los pacientes internados ya con sonda (HR: 3,56; IC 95 %: 1,31 a 9,66; p = 0,013) y la prescripción de opioides en comprimidos (RR: 6,09; IC 95 %: 1,37 a 27,2; p = 0,018) se asociaron a mayor riesgo de obstrucción. Conclusión: El desplazamiento o la retirada accidental de la sonda, así como su obstrucción se presentaron con frecuencia. El historial de accidente cerebrovascular, el puntaje superior en la escala de coma de Glasgow y la mayor edad son riesgos para el desplazamiento, mientras que la obstrucción es más frecuente en los pacientes con sonda ya al ingreso y en quienes reciben opioides en comprimidos vía sonda (AU)

Factors predicting non-ventilated hospital-acquired pneumonia: systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) results in approximately 15-20% of all infections in hospitals, with more than two-thirds being in patients not using mechanical ventilation. The incidence of non-ventilated hospital-acquired pneumonia (NVHAP) is increasing, and it is associated with a longer length of stay, the need for intensive care unit hospitalization and mechanical ventilation use, and higher mortality. AIM: To identify, quantify, and summarize predictive factors for NVHAP in adult patients admitted to non-intensive care units as determined by previous observational studies. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and LILACS were systematically searched. Case-control and cohort studies were included, and a meta-analysis was performed for all factors studied more than once. National Institute of Health assessment tools were applied to assess the quality of the studies. FINDINGS: Thirty-eight articles showing 204 predictive factors were included. A meta-analysis was performed for 58 factors, 32 of which were significantly associated with NVHAP. When the sensitivity analysis was performed without poor-quality studies, 24 factors remained associated with NVHAP. CONCLUSION: Although there is a lack of good-quality studies to establish predictive factors for NVHAP, the results of this study showed 24 factors associated with the development of this infectious complication. Knowledge of the significant predictive factors for NVHAP will enable the identification of patients most likely to develop it.