A scoping review to map the implications of reusing single-use endotracheal suctioning catheter practices in mechanically ventilated patients.

Intensive Crit Care Nurs

School of Nursing and Midwifery, Faculty of Health, University of Plymouth, United Kingdom; The Curtin School of Nursing, Curtin University, Perth, Australia; Department of Nursing, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.

Published: October 2024

AI Article Synopsis

  • A scoping review examined the reuse of single-use endotracheal suction catheters in low- and middle-income countries, highlighting limited evidence on their usage and potential impacts on patient outcomes.
  • Six articles were included in the review, revealing mixed findings: two studies indicated a higher risk of respiratory infections with reuse, while others found no significant difference or suggested benefits like reduced ventilator-associated pneumonia when using chlorhexidine.
  • The review concluded that more research is needed to thoroughly compare the outcomes of single-use versus multiple-use endotracheal suction catheters for mechanically ventilated patients.

Article Abstract

Introduction: Currently there is limited evidence of the frequency of using endotracheal suctioning catheters. Due to limited resources, many low- and middle-income countries still reuse single-use suction catheters multiple times during the length of a nursing shift. This scoping review was conducted to map the impact of reusing single-use endotracheal suctioning catheters practices on mechanically ventilated patients' outcomes.

Methods: The scoping review was conducted in accordance with the JBI methodology for scoping reviews. Four databases systematically searched using predefined keywords (CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, GLOBAL HEALTH). Key electronic journals were hand searched, while reference lists of included documents and grey literature sources were screened thoroughly. Two independent reviewers completed the study selection and data extraction. A third reviewer made the final decision on any disagreements disputed records.

Results: In total 22 articles were identified, and 14 non-duplicate records were screened, and 8 articles were screened for full text. Six articles met the inclusion criteria and were included in this review. Differences were observed on the findings of included studies, two studies identified that reusing single-use suction catheter might increases the risk of respiratory infection, while two other studies identified no difference in contamination rate between single used or multiple-used catheters. One study indicated that reusing single-use catheters are a safe and cost-effective intervention and finally one study reported that reusing single-use catheters might reduce incidence of ventilator associated pneumonia if flushed with chlorhexidine after suctioning.

Conclusions: There is no strong evidence of the frequency of using endotracheal suction catheters. Further research is needed comparing single-used versus multiple-used endotracheal suction catheters in mechanically ventilated patients.

Implication For Clinical Practice: Nurses in resource-limited countries can follow their hospital policy regarding the changing frequency of endotracheal suction catheters due to lack of a robust evidence. Flushing suction circuits with chlorhexidine while reusing single-use catheters might reduce the risk of respiratory infections in these hospitals.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.iccn.2024.103848DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

reusing single-use
24
suction catheters
16
scoping review
12
endotracheal suctioning
12
mechanically ventilated
12
frequency endotracheal
12
single-use catheters
12
endotracheal suction
12
catheters
10
single-use endotracheal
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!