2014
DOI: 10.1007/s00595-014-1078-y
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparison of the efficacy of chlorhexidine gluconate versus povidone iodine as preoperative skin preparation for the prevention of surgical site infections in clean-contaminated upper abdominal surgeries

Abstract: The incidence of SSIs after clean-contaminated upper abdominal surgeries was lower with the use of chlorhexidine skin preparation than with povidone iodine preparation, although the results were not statistically significant. However, the odds ratio between the two groups favored the use of chlorhexidine over povidone iodine for preventing SSIs.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
57
1
9

Year Published

2016
2016
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 61 publications
(71 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
2
57
1
9
Order By: Relevance
“…6,[25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36] In our study, there was a low incidence of contact dermatitis, and no significant difference between groups, consistent with sim ilarly low incidences (0% to 0.8%) reported in the literature. 6,29,34 Staphylococcus aureus was the primary organism cultured from wound swabs, again consistent with previous studies.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 86%
“…6,[25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36] In our study, there was a low incidence of contact dermatitis, and no significant difference between groups, consistent with sim ilarly low incidences (0% to 0.8%) reported in the literature. 6,29,34 Staphylococcus aureus was the primary organism cultured from wound swabs, again consistent with previous studies.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 86%
“…13,[20][21][22][23][24] Two trials reported on patients who had a clean surgery, 20,21 three trials included patients underwent clean contaminated surgery, 13,22,23 and one trial on mixed surgery patients (clean, clean contaminated, and contaminated surgery) as shown in Table 2. 24 The experiment group used chlorhexidine scrub and/or paint in varying concentrations (from 0.5% to 4%) with a mixture or addition of 70% isoprophyl-alcohol.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…13,[21][22][23][24] One trial showed nonsignificant decreases in the number of SSIs with chlorhexidine use, 22 one trial found out nonsignificant increases in the number of SSIs with chlorhexidine use, 23 and one trial reported no SSIs in either study groups. 20 All six studies reported the post-operative SSI rates.…”
Section: Surgical Site Infectionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Las características químicas del alcohol juegan un papel importante en potenciar la capacidad de clorhexidina para penetrar hasta el estrato córneo de la piel y lograr así el efecto residual 51 . Pero, de todas formas, se debe tener en cuenta que, por ser una molécula catiónica, su actividad puede verse reducida por jabones naturales, aniones inorgánicos, surfactantes no iónicos y cremas de manos que contengan agentes aniónicos que disminuyan el efecto de clorhexidina o faciliten su precipitación 52 . En la Tabla 3 se visualizan factores que influyen en la acción de clorhexidina.…”
Section: Tiempo De Acciónunclassified
“…Sin embargo, el OR fue de 0,3 entre los dos grupos a favor del uso de clorhexidina sobre la povidona yodada para la prevención de ISQ. En la primera semana post operatoria fue de 7% en grupo CHG versus 14,1%, lo cual fue estadísticamente significativo, (p = 0,03) 52 . En cirugías de cesáreas se observó beneficio al utilizar gluconato de clorhexidina en base alcohólica versus povidona en base alcohólica; la tasa de infección fue de 4% en el grupo de CHG-OH versus 7,2% en el grupo de I-OH con un RR 0,55 (IC 0,34-0,9) p = 0,02 36 .…”
Section: • Prevención De Infección De Herida Operatoriaunclassified