Oral health Archives - Critical Care Science (CCS)
Abstract
Rev Bras Ter Intensiva. 2018;30(3):327-332
DOI 10.5935/0103-507X.20180044
To evaluate the practice of dentistry in intensive care units.
An observational survey study was conducted in which questionnaires were sent via the online platform for collaboration in intensive care research in Brazil (AMIBnet). The study was carried out from June to October 2017. The questionnaires, which contained 26 closed questions about hospitals and dentistry practices in the intensive care units, were sent to 4,569 professionals from different specialties practicing in the units.
In total, 203 questionnaires were returned, resulting in a response rate of 4.44%. Most of the responses were from intensive care units in the Southeast region of the country (46.8%). Public hospitals (37.9%) and private hospitals (36.4%) had similar participation rates. Of the respondents, 55% indicated that a bedside dentistry service was present, and they were provided in different ways.
The presence of dentistry services and oral health service delivery training and protocols were correlated. The oral care methods varied greatly among the intensive care units surveyed.
Abstract
Rev Bras Ter Intensiva. 2018;30(3):327-332
DOI 10.5935/0103-507X.20180044
To evaluate the practice of dentistry in intensive care units.
An observational survey study was conducted in which questionnaires were sent via the online platform for collaboration in intensive care research in Brazil (AMIBnet). The study was carried out from June to October 2017. The questionnaires, which contained 26 closed questions about hospitals and dentistry practices in the intensive care units, were sent to 4,569 professionals from different specialties practicing in the units.
In total, 203 questionnaires were returned, resulting in a response rate of 4.44%. Most of the responses were from intensive care units in the Southeast region of the country (46.8%). Public hospitals (37.9%) and private hospitals (36.4%) had similar participation rates. Of the respondents, 55% indicated that a bedside dentistry service was present, and they were provided in different ways.
The presence of dentistry services and oral health service delivery training and protocols were correlated. The oral care methods varied greatly among the intensive care units surveyed.
Abstract
Rev Bras Ter Intensiva. 2013;25(1):44-48
DOI 10.1590/S0103-507X2013000100009
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of a tongue cleaner in the removal of tongue biofilm in mechanically ventilated patients. METHODS: Tongue biofilm and tracheal secretion samples were collected from a total of 50 patients: 27 in the study group (SG) who were intubated or tracheostomized under assisted ventilation and treated with the tongue cleaner and 23 in the control group (CG) who did not undergo tongue cleaning. Oral and tracheal secretion cultures of the SG (initially and after 5 days) and the CG (at a single time-point) were performed to evaluate the changes in bacterial flora. RESULTS: The median age of the SG patients was 77 years (45-99 years), and that of the CG patients was 79 years (21-94 years). The length of hospital stay ranged from 17-1,370 days for the SG with a median stay of 425 days and from 4-240 days for the CG with a median stay of 120 days. No significant differences were found when the dental plaque indexes were compared between the SG and the CG. There was no correlation between the index and the length of hospital stay. The same bacterial flora was found in the dental plaque of 9 of the 27 SG patients before and after the tongue scraper was used for 5 days compared with the CG (p=0.683). Overall, 7 of the 27 SG patients had positive bacterial cultures for the same strains in both tongue biofilm and tracheal secretions compared with the CG (p=0.003). Significant similarities in strain resistance and susceptibility of the assessed microorganisms were observed between oral and tracheal microflora in 6/23 cases in the CG (p=0.006). CONCLUSION: The use of a tongue cleaner is effective at reducing tongue biofilm in patients on mechanical ventilation and facilitates oral hygiene interventions performed by caregivers.
Abstract
Rev Bras Ter Intensiva. 2013;25(1):44-48
DOI 10.1590/S0103-507X2013000100009
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of a tongue cleaner in the removal of tongue biofilm in mechanically ventilated patients. METHODS: Tongue biofilm and tracheal secretion samples were collected from a total of 50 patients: 27 in the study group (SG) who were intubated or tracheostomized under assisted ventilation and treated with the tongue cleaner and 23 in the control group (CG) who did not undergo tongue cleaning. Oral and tracheal secretion cultures of the SG (initially and after 5 days) and the CG (at a single time-point) were performed to evaluate the changes in bacterial flora. RESULTS: The median age of the SG patients was 77 years (45-99 years), and that of the CG patients was 79 years (21-94 years). The length of hospital stay ranged from 17-1,370 days for the SG with a median stay of 425 days and from 4-240 days for the CG with a median stay of 120 days. No significant differences were found when the dental plaque indexes were compared between the SG and the CG. There was no correlation between the index and the length of hospital stay. The same bacterial flora was found in the dental plaque of 9 of the 27 SG patients before and after the tongue scraper was used for 5 days compared with the CG (p=0.683). Overall, 7 of the 27 SG patients had positive bacterial cultures for the same strains in both tongue biofilm and tracheal secretions compared with the CG (p=0.003). Significant similarities in strain resistance and susceptibility of the assessed microorganisms were observed between oral and tracheal microflora in 6/23 cases in the CG (p=0.006). CONCLUSION: The use of a tongue cleaner is effective at reducing tongue biofilm in patients on mechanical ventilation and facilitates oral hygiene interventions performed by caregivers.