Original Article
Active surveillance of ventilator-associated pneumonia in the intensive care unit and establishment of the risk grading system and effect evaluation
Abstract
Background: To discuss ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) patient’s clinical characteristic and related factors in the intensive care unit (ICU), and to establish a risk grading system for VAP patients in the ICU in order to provide a reference for VAP prevention.
Methods: A total of 1,513 patients in eight ICUs who received mechanical ventilation between June 2015 and June 2018 were randomized and into two groups, with 908 patients in the model group and 605 patients in the verification group. The model group was used to analyze the influencing factors of VAP and establish a risk grading system, while the verification group was used to verify the risk grading system. A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to evaluate the predictive effect of the grading system.
Results: During the 3-year study period, of the 1,513 total patients, 188 patients were infected with VAP, leading to an incidence rate of 12.43% (188/1,513) and an infection rate of 15.23‰ (188/12,347). ICU length of stay, mechanical ventilation days, frequency of oral care, unused subglottic secretion drainage, tracheotomy, APACHE II score, and combined antibiotics use were risk factors of VAP infection for patients who received mechanical ventilation in the modeling group (P<0.05). In a VAP risk-grading system established based on risk factors, the high, medium and low-grade patients had a statistically significantly different VAP infection rate in the model group, and patients with a high grade had a higher risk of VAP infection. Patients’ data in the model and verification groups were used to draw a ROC curve which showed a good predictive effect.
Conclusions: This study establishes and verifies the VAP risk grading system for patients who receive mechanical ventilation. It is helpful in high-risk patient surveillance and in reducing and preventing VAP infection.
Methods: A total of 1,513 patients in eight ICUs who received mechanical ventilation between June 2015 and June 2018 were randomized and into two groups, with 908 patients in the model group and 605 patients in the verification group. The model group was used to analyze the influencing factors of VAP and establish a risk grading system, while the verification group was used to verify the risk grading system. A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to evaluate the predictive effect of the grading system.
Results: During the 3-year study period, of the 1,513 total patients, 188 patients were infected with VAP, leading to an incidence rate of 12.43% (188/1,513) and an infection rate of 15.23‰ (188/12,347). ICU length of stay, mechanical ventilation days, frequency of oral care, unused subglottic secretion drainage, tracheotomy, APACHE II score, and combined antibiotics use were risk factors of VAP infection for patients who received mechanical ventilation in the modeling group (P<0.05). In a VAP risk-grading system established based on risk factors, the high, medium and low-grade patients had a statistically significantly different VAP infection rate in the model group, and patients with a high grade had a higher risk of VAP infection. Patients’ data in the model and verification groups were used to draw a ROC curve which showed a good predictive effect.
Conclusions: This study establishes and verifies the VAP risk grading system for patients who receive mechanical ventilation. It is helpful in high-risk patient surveillance and in reducing and preventing VAP infection.
