Paint-only is equivalent to scrub-and-paint in preoperative preparation of abdominal surgery sites. Chlorhexidine provides superior skin decontamination in foot and ankle surgery: a prospective randomized study. Comparison of surgical wound infection after preoperative skin preparation with 4% chlorhexidine [correction of chlohexidine] and povidone iodine: a prospective randomized trial. Usefulness of an alcohol solution of N-duopropenide for the surgical antisepsis of the hands compared with handwashing with iodine-povidone and chlorhexidine: clinical essay. Minimizing wound contamination in a 'clean' surgery: comparison of chlorhexidine-ethanol and povidone-iodine. Prospective randomized comparison of two preoperative skin preparation techniques in a developing world country. A comparison of the effects of preoperative whole-body bathing with detergent alone and with detergent containing chlorhexidine gluconate on the frequency of wound infections after clean surgery. The European Working Party on Control of Hospital Infections. Efficacy of surgical preparation solutions in shoulder surgery. Comparison of two alcohol-based surgical scrub solutions with an iodine-based scrub brush for presurgical antiseptic effectiveness in a community hospital. Does the addition of pre-operative skin preparation with povidone-iodine reduce groin sepsis following arterial surgery? An evaluation of five protocols for surgical handwashing in relation to skin condition and microbial counts.
Antiseptic preoperative skin site preparation is used to prepare the operative site before making a surgical incision. The goal of this preparation is a reduction in postoperative wound infection. The most straightforward technique necessary to achieve this goal remains controversial.
                A prospective randomized trial was designed to prove equivalency for two commonly used techniques of surgical skin site preparation. Two hundred thirty-four patients undergoing nonlaparoscopic abdominal operations were consented for the trial. Exclusion criteria included presence of active infection at the time of operation, neutropenia, history of skin reaction to iodine, or anticipated insertion of prosthetic material at the time of operation. Patients were randomized to receive either a vigorous 5-minute scrub with povidone-iodine soap, followed by absorption with a sterile towel, and a paint with aqueous povidone-iodine or surgical site preparation with a povidone-iodine paint only. The primary end point of the study was wound infection rate at 30 days, defined as presence of clinical signs of infection requiring therapeutic intervention.
                Patients randomized to the scrub-and-paint arm (n = 115) and the paint-only arm (n = 119) matched at baseline with respect to age, comorbidity, wound classification, mean operative time, placement of drains, prophylactic antibiotic use, and surgical procedure (all p > 0.09). Wound infection occurred in 12 (10%) scrub-and-paint patients, and 12 (10%) paint-only patients. Based on our predefined equivalency parameters, we conclude equivalence of infection rates between the two preparations.
                Preoperative preparation of the abdomen with a scrub with povidone-iodine soap followed by a paint with aqueous povidone-iodine can be abandoned in favor of a paint with aqueous povidone-iodine alone. This change will result in reductions in operative times and costs. Feet are prone to bacterial contamination. We hypothesized that chlorhexidine scrub and isopropyl alcohol paint provide superior local flora reduction than povidone-iodine scrub and paint. Patients with intact, uninfected skin having clean elective foot and ankle surgery were prospectively enrolled and randomly assigned to skin preparation with povidone-iodine (Group 1) or chlorhexidine scrub and isopropyl alcohol paint (Group 2). Culture swabs (aerobic, anaerobic, acid fast, fungus, and routine antibiotic sensitivity) were taken from all web spaces, nail folds, toe surfaces, and proposed surgical incision sites. One-hundred twenty-seven patients were enrolled (mean age, 46 years; range, 16-85 years). Sixty-seven patients were assigned to Group 1; 60 patients were assigned to Group 2. In Group 1, 53 of 67 patients (79%) had positive cultures; in Group 2, 23 of 60 patients (38%) had positive cultures. These data indicate that chlorhexidine and alcohol provide better reduction in bacterial carriage than povidone-iodine. Based on these data, we recommended chlorhexidine as the surgical preparatory agent for the foot and ankle.
                Therapeutic study, Level I-1a (significant difference). See the Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence. Antiseptic scrub and paint can reduce bacterial colonization and postoperative wound infection. Two forms of antiseptics, povidone iodine and chlorhexidine, are commonly used in the operating theater.
                To study the efficacy of the reduction of bacterial colonization and surgical wound infection among these antiseptic.
                Five hundred surgical patients were randomly divided into two groups. Povidone Iodine and Chlorhexidine were used for skin preparation in group 1 and 2 respectively Bacterial colonization and postoperative wound infection were examined after skin preparation. Demographic data was analyzed by student's t test; the culture result and surgical wound infection were analyzed by Mantel-Haenszel method for relative risk and 95% CI.
                There was a significant reduction of bacterial colonization and wound infection after skin preparation in group 2 compared with group 1.
                Colonization of bacterial and postoperative surgical wound infection were significantly reduced in the chlorhexidine group. Chlorhexidine antiseptic should be the first consideration for preoperative skin preparation. The usual surgical antisepsis involves scrubbing the skin with antiseptic solutions. This procedure can damage the skin, with the subsequent risk of infection for the patient. There are several efficient and quick-acting antiseptic alcohol solutions that require no scrubbing.
                We compare four alcohol solutions with the classic surgical handwashing products (chlorhexidine and iodine-povidone), in both in vitro (pigskin germ carriers) and in vivo studies. The latter (clinical essays) were done with healthy volunteers (crossed design) as well as with 154 surgical team members (Plastic Surgery or Traumatology), whose hand microbial flora were measured before and after scrubbing up and after surgery.
                Because of its efficiency in the germ carrier, we chose a solution of N-duopropenide in 60 degrees alcohol with emollients for further comparison with the standard surgical scrub: 4% chlorhexidine and 7.5% iodine-povidone. The quantitative, semiquantitative, and qualitative results obtained with N-duopropenide without scrubbing were better in the healthy volunteers and surgical teams. This product reduced hand microorganisms by more than 2 log, and maintained the reduction for the entire study period. Four percent chlorhexidine initially reduced colonization more than 2 log but lost part of its effect over time during the surgical intervention. Last, 7.5% iodine-povidone reduced the germs by 1 log but at the end of surgery there were even more germs than before washing.
                Because of its efficacy, persistent effect, and skin protection, we advise that scrubbing with classic antiseptic solutions be replaced with gentle washing with an alcohol solution such as N-duopropenide in alcohol.
                Copyright 2000 Academic Press. There is limited work analyzing the efficacy of different antiseptics in reducing wound contamination by the skin flora during hernia repair and its influence on the incidence of wound infection, which continues to be a major problem in the developing world. This study was designed to test if chlorhexidine-ethanol has superior antimicrobial efficacy compared with povidone-iodine.
                In a prospective randomized trial, the efficacy of chlorhexidine-ethanol and povidone-iodine in the reduction of colony counts of the skin flora and the incidence of surgical site infection was compared.
                Both povidone-iodine and chlorhexidine-ethanol produced significant reduction in the skin bacterial colony counts, from 18.66 x 10(2) to 2.34 x 10(2) colony-forming units with povidone-iodine (59%) and from 12.34 x 10(2) to 0.93 x 10(2) colony-forming units (82%) with chlorhexidine-ethanol. Infection rates with the use of povidone-iodine and chlorhexidine-ethanol groups were not significantly different (9.5 vs. 7.0; p = 0.364). The reduction in colony counts in those who developed infection was only 15.6% compared with 77.1% in those who did not develop infection.
                The antibacterial efficacy of chlorhexidine-ethanol and povidone-iodine is comparable in open hernia repair.
                Copyright © 2010 S. Karger AG, Basel. Povidone-iodine (PI) is a scarce and expensive item for some hospitals in developing countries. This prospective, randomized study was performed at Baptist Medical Centre (BMCO) in Ogbomoso, Nigeria to determine if the use of PI for preoperative skin preparation would result in a lower postoperative wound infection rate and to identify other factors influencing the infection rate. Two hundred patients undergoing inguinal hernia repair were randomized to receive skin preparation with either: (1) locally available, inexpensive market soap and methylated spirit or (2) imported PI. The two groups were equally stratified. The overall postoperative wound infection rate was 5.5%, and there was no significant difference between the groups (5.1% vs. 5.9%). Factors that did not affect the infection rate included gender, age, type of anesthesia, type or duration of the operative procedure, and number of breaks in optimal technique. There were eight abscesses and three cases of cellulitis without suppuration diagnosed an average of 10 days postoperatively. Staphylococcus was the only bacterium identified on Gram stain or culture. The expense of procuring PI is not justified at BMCO. Available funds may better be used for preoperative antibiotics or for improvement in hospital infrastructure, which should result in fewer breaks in optimal operating room technique. In a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study involving 27 surgical units in six European countries, the effect of preoperative whole-body bathing on two occasions with a detergent containing chlorhexidine (CHX+) on the incidence of wound infection in elective, clean surgery was compared with two bathings with a detergent without chlorhexidine (CHX-). In the CHX+ group 2.62% of 1413 patients and in the CHX- group 2.36% of 1400 patients subsequently became infected. The infection rate in the CHX+ group was 1.11 times that in the CHX- group with 95% confidence limits ranging between 0.69 and 1.82. Consequently, bathing patients twice preoperatively with chlorhexidine-detergent did not reduce the incidence of infection of clean wounds. Deep infection following shoulder surgery is a rare but devastating problem. The use of an effective skin-preparation solution may be an important step in preventing infection. The purposes of the present study were to examine the native bacteria around the shoulder and to determine the efficacy of three different surgical skin-preparation solutions on the eradication of bacteria from the shoulder.
                A prospective study was undertaken to evaluate 150 consecutive patients undergoing shoulder surgery at one institution. Each shoulder was prepared with one of three randomly selected solutions: ChloraPrep (2% chlorhexidine gluconate and 70% isopropyl alcohol), DuraPrep (0.7% iodophor and 74% isopropyl alcohol), or povidone-iodine scrub and paint (0.75% iodine scrub and 1.0% iodine paint). Aerobic and anaerobic cultures were obtained prior to skin preparation for the first twenty patients, to determine the native bacteria around the shoulder, and following skin preparation for all patients.
                Coagulase-negative Staphylococcus and Propionibacterium acnes were the most commonly isolated organisms prior to skin preparation. The overall rate of positive cultures was 31% in the povidone-iodine group, 19% in the DuraPrep group, and 7% in the ChloraPrep group. The positive culture rate for the ChloraPrep group was lower than that for the povidone-iodine group (p < 0.0001) and the DuraPrep group (p = 0.01). ChloraPrep and DuraPrep were more effective than povidone-iodine in eliminating coagulase-negative Staphylococcus from the shoulder region (p < 0.001 for both). No significant difference was detected among the agents in their ability to eliminate Propionibacterium acnes from the shoulder region. No infections occurred in any of the patients treated in this study at a minimum of ten months of follow-up.
                ChloraPrep is more effective than DuraPrep and povidone-iodine at eliminating overall bacteria from the shoulder region. Both ChloraPrep and DuraPrep are more effective than povidone-iodine at eliminating coagulase-negative Staphylococcus from the shoulder. The antiseptic effectiveness and acceptability of a commercial alcohol-based waterless (ABWL) and an alcohol-based water-aided (ABWA) scrub solution were compared with a brush-based iodine solution (BBIS) under conditions encountered in community hospital operating rooms. This randomized partially blinded study was based on guidelines from the American Society for Testing and Methods. The three scrub solutions were compared for antimicrobial efficacy, using criteria within the Food and Drug Administration's Tentative Final Monograph for Healthcare Antiseptic Products (FDA-TFM), and for participants' acceptance of the products. Volunteer surgical staff that worked daily in the same operating room for the entire duration of the study were enrolled. In total, 1126 surgical scrub procedures were performed over the duration of the study. Only the ABWL met all of the FDA-TFM criteria. The BBIS performed better than both of the alcohol-based solutions at the end of Day 1 (P=0.03), but the ABWL was more efficacious than the ABWA and the BBIS at the end of Days 2 and 5 (P=0.02 and 0.01, respectively). When colony-count reductions were compared over the entire duration of the study, there was no significant difference between the three solutions (P=0.2). The participants found the ABWL easiest to use (P<0.001), with the fewest adverse effects on skin (P=0.007), and it was their preferred product (P<0.001). Although both of the commercially available alcohol-based solutions may be considered as acceptable alternatives to the BBIS for presurgical antisepsis, the ABWL was found to have significantly higher user acceptability. Sixty-four consecutive patients undergoing elective vascular surgery involving exposure of the femoral artery at the groin were randomized to one of two groups. Group A (N = 34) received twice-daily skin preparation with 10% aqueous povidone-iodine for 48 h preoperatively, while group B (N = 30) did not. Both groups were examined on a daily basis following surgery and any discharge from the wound was recorded and sent for bacteriological culture. The groups were well matched for age, sex and the type of vascular graft material used. In group A there were six (18.7%) groin wound infections and in group B there were five (17.2%). In this series of patients the addition of preoperative skin preparation with 10% povidone-iodine to standard peri-operative prophylaxis had no effect on the incidence of postoperative groin wound sepsis. Five protocols for surgical handwashing (scrubbing) were evaluated for their efficiency of removal of micro-organisms and their drying effect on the skin. The scrubbing protocols tested were: (1) an initial scrub of 5 min and consecutive scrubs of 3.5 min with chlorhexidine gluconate 4% (CHG-5); (2) an initial scrub of 3 min and consecutive scrubs of 2.5 min with chlorhexidine gluconate 4% (CHG-3); (3) an initial scrub of 3 min and consecutive scrubs of 2.5 min with povidone iodine 5% and triclosan 1% (PI-3); (4) an initial scrub of 2 min with chlorhexidine gluconate 4% followed by a 30 s application of isopropanol 70% and chlorhexidine gluconate 0.5%, and a 30 s application of isopropanol 70% and chlorhexidine gluconate 0.5% for consecutive scrubs (IPA); and (5) an initial scrub of 2 min with chlorhexidine gluconate 4% followed by a 30 s application of ethanol 70% and chlorhexidine gluconate 0.5%, and a 30 s application of ethanol 70% and chlorhexidine gluconate 0.5% for consecutive scrubs (EA). A convenience sample of 23 operating theatre nurses completed each scrub protocol for one week in a randomized order. A week of normal work activities intervened between each protocol. Subjects were assessed before commencing and after completing the week of each protocol to determine changes in the microbial counts and skin condition of the hands. Specimens for microbial analysis were collected before, immediately after and 2 h after an initial scrub, and 2 h after a consecutive scrub. The CHG-5, CHG-3 and PI-3 protocols, which used detergent-based antiseptics only, were compared with protocols incorporating an alcohol-based antiseptic (IPA and EA). The protocols incorporating alcohol-based antiseptics and the CHG-5 protocol were generally associated with the lowest post-scrub numbers of colony forming units (cfu). No difference between the CHG-5 protocol and the alcohol-based antiseptics was found at the beginning of the test week, but after exclusive use of the respective protocols for a week, the alcohol-based antiseptics were associated with significantly lower cfu numbers in two out of the three post-scrub samples (P = 0.003, P = 0.035). Although virtually no statistically significant differences in skin condition were found, many subjects reported the alcohol-based antiseptic protocols to be less drying on the skin. The findings of this study support the proposition that a scrub protocol using alcohol-based antiseptics is as effective and no more damaging to skin than more time-consuming, conventional methods using detergent-based antiseptics.
A comprehensive review of current evidence found some evidence that preoperative skin preparation with 0.5% chlorhexidine in methylated spirits was associated with lower rates of SSIs following clean surgery than alcohol-based povidone iodine paint. However this single study was poorly reported. Practitioners may therefore elect to consider other characteristics such as costs and potential side effects when choosing between alternatives.
The design of future trials should be driven by the questions of high priority to decision makers. It may be that investment in at least one large trial (in terms of participants) is warranted in order to add definitive and hopefully conclusive data to the current evidence base. Ideally any future trial would evaluate the iodine-containing and chlorhexidine-containing solutions relevant to current practice as well as the type of solution used (alcohol vs. aqueous).