The Clinical Nursing Pathway on Prevention of Catheter Slippage with Intensive Care Unit Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Abstract

Objective. To evaluate the prevention effect of the clinical nursing pathway (CNP) of catheter slippage with intensive care unit (ICU) patients. Methods. Primary databases were electronically searched from the inception up to June 25, 2021. Randomized clinical trials of CNP versus routine nursing for prevention of catheter slippage with ICU patients were included. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool and the quality of included studies using the Jadad rating scale. A meta-analysis was conducted using the Cochrane collaboration’s RevMan5.3 software. Results. Eight studies met the inclusion criteria. The findings of the meta-analysis revealed that the comparison of CNP and routine nursing was applied in ICU patients, the catheter slippage incidence rate odds ratio (OR) was 0.11, with 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.05, 0.24), and the difference was statistically significant ( P < 0.00001 ). The catheter infection rate OR was 0.15, with 95% CI (0.06, 0.37), and the difference was statistically significant ( P < 0.0001 ). The nursing satisfaction OR was 14.06, with 95% CI (5.71, 34.63), and the difference was statistically significant ( P < 0.00001 ). Conclusion. Compared with routine nursing, the application of CNP in ICU patients can effectively reduce the incidence of catheter slippage, reduce the infection rate of the catheter, and improve the nursing satisfaction.

Retracted: The Clinical Nursing Pathway on Prevention of Catheter Slippage with Intensive Care Unit Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

“…This article has been retracted by Hindawi following an investigation undertaken by the publisher [ 1 ]. This investigation has uncovered evidence of one or more of the following indicators of systematic manipulation of the publication process: Discrepancies in scope Discrepancies in the description of the research reported Discrepancies between the availability of data and the research described Inappropriate citations Incoherent, meaningless and/or irrelevant content included in the article Peer-review manipulation …”

“…Tis article has been retracted by Hindawi following an investigation undertaken by the publisher [1]. Tis investigation has uncovered evidence of one or more of the following indicators of systematic manipulation of the publication process:…”