Search

Background: There is a wide variety of preventive methods currently available for the treatment of exposure keratopathy. Because of a lack of evidence from head-to-head randomized controlled trials (RCTs), the relative effects of these preventive methods in exposure keratopathy patients remain unclear. The purpose of our study is to carry out a network meta-analysis comparing the efficacy of different methods for the prevention of exposure keratopathy and rank these nursing methods for practical consideration., Methods: A literature search was performed of the MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure Library (CNKI), China Science and Technology Journal Database (Weipu), WanFang Database and China Biology Medicine disc. Two authors independently extracted data from each included RCTs according to a predesigned Excel spreadsheet and assessed the methodological quality of included RCTs using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Data was analyzed using the R (V.3.6.2) and the Stata (V.15.0)., Results: 21 RCTs involving 2022 patients and evaluating 11 preventive methods were included. Rankings based on posterior probabilities revealed that artificial tear ointment might be the best way to prevent exposure keratopathy (35%), polyethylene covers might be the second-best (31%), swimming goggles might be the third-best (21%), foam dressing might be the fourth-best (18%)., Conclusions: This network meta-analysis indicated that artificial tear ointment, polyethylene covers, swimming goggles and foam dressing might be selected for the prevention of exposure keratopathy in intensive care unit patients, which is important in future research. Although evidence is scant, more attention should be paid to head-to-head comparisons of the most commonly used prevention methods in this field., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Intensive care unit-acquired weakness (ICUAW) occurs frequently in the context of critical illness without alternative plausible cause and specific treatment options, and it is important to identify and summarize the independent risk factors for ICUAW. PubMed, Embase, Central, China Biological Medicine, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, VIP and Wanfang databases were searched from database inception until 10 July 2017. Prospective cohort studies on adult ICU patients who were diagnosed with ICUAW using either clinical or electrophysiological criteria were selected. Meta-analysis was performed using Stata version 12.0. The results were analysed using odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Data were pooled using a random-effects model, and heterogeneity was assessed using the I 2 statistic. Qualitative analysis and systematic review were used for risk factors that were deemed inappropriate to combine. Fourteen prospective cohort studies were included in this review. The meta-analysis showed that Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score (OR, 1.05; 95%CI, 1.01-1.10), neuromuscular blocking agents (OR, 2.03; 95%CI, 1.22-3.40) and aminoglycosides (OR, 2.27; 95%CI, 1.07-4.81) were found to be significantly associated with ICUAW. Other risk factors, including female, multiple organ failure, systemic inflammatory response syndrome, sepsis, electrolyte disturbances, hyperglycaemia, hyperosmolarity, high lactate level, duration of mechanical ventilation, parenteral nutrition and use of norepinephrine, were statistically significant on multivariable analysis in each single studies. This review provides a number of independent risk factors for ICUAW, which should be guided for early prediction and prevention of the disorder., (© 2018 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)