SynthesisPloS one2024
Herbal oral care products for the prevention of ventilator-associated pneumonia: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised trials.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Comparison of the effects of Persica and protact mouthwash on gingival healing after crown lengthening surgery - A double-blinded randomized clinical trial.Dental research journal · 2025Article
- Impact of an Educational Intervention on Oral Health Knowledge Among Nursing Staff Caring for Hospitalized Patients in a Brazilian Hospital: A Quasi-Experimental Study.Special care in dentistry : official publication of the American Association of Hospital Dentists, the Academy of Dentistry for the Handicapped, and the American Society for Geriatric DentistryArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe recommendation for Chlorhexidine (CHX) as a traditional oral care solution is decreasing, and herbal oral care products are being considered as a potential alternative. This network meta-analysis aims to determine if herbal oral care products for oral care in mechanically ventilated patients are superior to CHX and provide direction for future research by comparing the effectiveness of herbal oral care products currently available. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe searched for English-language published and grey literature sources of randomized clinical trials involving herbal oral care solutions in intensive care unit (ICU) oral care (until September 2023). The primary outcome was the incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP); the secondary outcome was the oral microbiota quantity. Data were pooled by pairwise meta-analysis and Bayesian network meta-analysis. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool, and the certainty of evidence was evaluated using the GRADE framework.
resultsOur network meta-analysis included 29 studies, and the results showed that Chinese herb (OR: 0.39, 95% CI: 0.2-0.75) and Miswak (OR: 0.27, 95% CI: 0.07-0.91) were more effective in reducing VAP incidence than CHX. In terms of reducing bacterial counts, Chinese herb (OR: 0.3, 95% CI: 0.19-0.48) was superior to CHX, and all herbal oral care products, including Persica® (alcoholic extract of S. persica, Achillea millefolium, and Mentha spicata), Matrica® (Chamomile extract), and Listerine® (main components include Menthol, Thymol, and Eucalyptol), were better than saline in all aspects but without significant differences.
conclusionBased on our network meta-analysis, we have observed that Chinese herbal medicine and Miswak are superior to CHX in reducing the incidence of VAP. However, the safety and feasibility of traditional Chinese herbal medicine require further high-quality research for validation. Simultaneously, Matrica® demonstrates a significant reduction in microbial counts but does not exhibit a significant advantage in lowering the incidence of VAP. This observation aligns with the results of clinical double-blind trials. Therefore, we identify Miswak and Matrica® as promising herbal oral care products with the potential to replace CHX. It is essential to emphasize that our study provides guidance for future research rather than conclusive determinations. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO no. CRD42023398022.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.