Xu 2008.

Methods	Study design: Parallel‐group RCT Location: Shandong, China Number of centres: 1 Study period: No stated Funding source: No external funding
Participants	Setting: ICU of the second hospital of Shandong University Inclusion criteria: Adults entering ICU receiving mechanical ventilation expected to last > 48 hours Exclusion criteria: Patients with pulmonary infections Number randomised: 116 Number evaluated: 116 Baseline characteristics: Not reported for each randomised group
Interventions	Comparison: Saline rinse versus saline swab Experimental group (n = 64): Rinse of the oropharyngeal cavity with saline for 5 ‐ 10 seconds, followed by suction aspiration and repeated 5 ‐ 10 times, twice daily Control group (n = 52): Standard oral care comprising scrubbing with a cotton ball soaked in saline, twice daily
Outcomes	VAP, duration of ventilation (days)
Notes	Diagnosis of VAP was according to Chinese Society of Respiratory Diseases criteria Information translated from Chinese paper by Shi Zongdao and colleagues
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	"randomly allocated". Method of sequence generation not described
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Not mentioned
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	High risk	Not possible
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Not mentioned
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	All randomised participants included in the outcome evaluation
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	Both outcomes listed in Methods are reported in the Results section
Other bias	Low risk	No other sources of bias identified