Cost assessment of a new oral care program in the intensive care unit to prevent ventilator-associated pneumonia.

OBJECTIVES: Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is the most frequent hospital-acquired infections in intensive care units (ICU). In the bundle of care to prevent the VAP, the oral care is very important strategies, to decrease the oropharyngeal bacterial colonization and presence of causative bacteria of VAP. In view of the paucity of medical economics studies, our objective was to determine the cost of implementing this oral care program for preventing VAP. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In five ICUs, during period 1, caregivers used a foam stick for oral care and, during period 2, a stick and tooth brushing with aspiration. Budgetary effect of the new program from the hospital's point of view was analyzed for both periods. The costs avoided were calculated from the incidence density of VAP (cases per 1000 days of intubation). The cost study included device cost, benefit lost, and ICU cost (medication, employer and employee contributions, blood sample analysis…). RESULTS: A total of 2030 intubated patients admitted to the ICUs benefited from oral care. The cost of implementing the study protocol was estimated to be €11,500 per year. VAP rates decreased significantly between the two periods (p1 = 12.8% and p2 = 8.5%, p = 0.002). The VAP revenue was ranged from €28,000 to €45,000 and the average cost from €39,906 to €42,332. The total cost assessment calculated was thus around €1.9 million in favor of the new oral care program. CONCLUSION AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Our study showed that the implementation of a simple strategy improved the quality of patient care is economically viable. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02400294.

Comparative study of 2 oral care protocols in intensive care units.

BACKGROUND: The quality of oral care is important in limiting the emergence of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) in intubated patients. Our main objective was to measure the quality improvement in oral care following the implementation of a new oral care protocol. We also monitored VAP rates. MATERIAL/METHODS: This was a cohort study of patients in 5 adult ICUs covering different specialties. During period 1, caregivers used a foam stick for oral care and during period 2 a stick and tooth brushing with aspiration. Oral chlorhexidine was used during both periods. The caregivers rated improvement in oral health on the basis of 4 criteria (tongue, mucous membranes, gingivae, and teeth). Caregiver satisfaction was also assessed. The incidence of VAP was monitored. RESULTS: A total of 2,030 intubated patients admitted to intensive care units benefited from oral care. The patient populations during the 2 periods were similar with regard to demographic data and VAP potential risk factors. Oral health was significantly better from the third day of oral care in period 2 onward (period 1, 6.4 ± 2.1; period 2, 5.6 ± 1.8; P = .043). Caregivers found the period 2 protocol easier to implement and more effective. VAP rates decreased significantly between the 2 periods (period 1, 12.8%; period 2, 8.5%; P = .002). CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed that the implementation of a simple strategy improved the quality of oral care of patients in intensive care units, and decreased VAP rates.