Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T09:30:51.501Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Effect of Preoperative Skin Preparation Products on Surgical Site Infection

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 May 2016

Heather L. Young ,
Sara Reese ,
Bryan Knepper ,
Amber Miller ,
Cyril Mauffrey  and
Connie S. Price
Heather L. Young*
Affiliation:
Division of Infectious Diseases, Denver Health Medical Center and University of Colorado Denver, Denver, Colorado
Sara Reese
Affiliation:
Department of Patient Safety and Quality, Denver Health Medical Center, Denver, Colorado
Bryan Knepper
Affiliation:
Department of Patient Safety and Quality, Denver Health Medical Center, Denver, Colorado
Amber Miller
Affiliation:
Department of Patient Safety and Quality, Denver Health Medical Center, Denver, Colorado
Cyril Mauffrey
Affiliation:
Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Denver Health Medical Center and University of Colorado Denver, Denver, Colorado
Connie S. Price
Affiliation:
Division of Infectious Diseases, Denver Health Medical Center and University of Colorado Denver, Denver, Colorado
*
Denver Health Medical Center, 660 Bannock Street, MC 4000, Denver, CO 80204 ([email protected]).
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Skin preparation products contribute to surgical site infection (SSI) prevention. In a case-control study, diabetes was associated with increased SSI (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 5.74 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.22–27.0]), while the use of chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) plus isopropyl alcohol versus CHG alone was found to be protective (adjusted OR, 2.64 [95% CI, 1.12–6.20]).

Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2014;35(12):1535–1538

Type
Brief Report
Information
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology , Volume 35 , Issue 12 , December 2014 , pp. 1535 - 1538
Copyright
© 2014 by The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America. All rights reserved.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Lewis, SS, Moehring, RW, Chen, LF, Sexton, DJ, Anderson, DJ. It’s time to change our focus: surgical site infections (SSI) account for the greatest proportion of hospital-acquired infections (HAIs). In: IDWeek; October 2–6, 2013; San Francisco.Google Scholar
2. Darouiche, RO, Wall, MJ Jr, Itani, KM, et al. Chlorhexidine-alcohol versus povidone-iodine for surgical-site antisepsis. N Engl J Med. 2010;362:18–26.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3. Lee, I, Agarwal, RK, Lee, BY, Fishman, NO, Umscheid, CA. Systematic review and cost analysis comparing use of chlorhexidine with use of iodine for preoperative skin antisepsis to prevent surgical site infection. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2010;31:1219–1229.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4. Swenson, B, Hedrick, T, Metzger, R, Bonatti, H, Pruett, T, Sawyer, R. Effects of preoperative skin preparation on postoperative wound infection rates: a prospective study of 3 skin preparation protocols. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2009;30:964–971.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Hakkarainen, TW, Dellinger, EP, Evans, HL, et al. Comparative effectiveness of skin antiseptic agents in reducing surgical site infections: a report from the Washington State Surgical Care and Outcomes Assessment Program. J Am Coll Surg 2014;218:336–344.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6. Hibbard, JS, Mulberry, GK, Brady, AR. A clinical study comparing the skin antisepsis and safety of ChloraPrep, 70% isopropyl alcohol, and 2% aqueous chlorhexidine. J Infus Nurs 2002;25:244–249.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7. Hibbard, JS. Analyses comparing the antimicrobial activity and safety of current antiseptic agents: a review. J Infus Nurs 2005;28:194–207.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8. Nazarko, L. Outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy: its delivery in the community. Br J Community Nurs 2013;18:163–167.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9. Mu, Y, Edwards, JR, Horan, TC, Berrios-Torres, SI, Fridkin, SK. Improving risk-adjusted measures of surgical site infection for the national healthcare safety network. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2011;32:970–986.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10. Xing, D, Ma, J, Ma, X, Song, D, Wang, J, Chen, Y, et al. A methodologic, systematic review of evidence-based independent risk factors for surgical site infections after spinal surgery. Eur Spine J 2013;22:605–615.Google ScholarPubMed
11. Xue, D, Qian, C, Yang, L, Wang, X. Risk factors for surgical site infections after breast surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Surg Oncol 2012;38:375–381.Google ScholarPubMed
12. Suchomel, M, Rotter, M, Weinlich, M, Kundi, M. Glycerol significantly decreases the three hour efficacy of alcohol-based surgical hand rubs. J Hosp Infect 2013;83:284–287.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13. Popovich, KJ, Lyles, R, Hayes, R, Hota, B, Trick, W, Weinstein, RA, et al. Relationship between chlorhexidine gluconate skin concentration and microbial density on the skin of critically ill patients bathed daily with chlorhexidine gluconate. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2012;33:889–896.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14. CareFusion. ChloraPrep FAQs. San Diego, CA: CareFusion, 2014.Google Scholar
15. Weber, SM, Hargunani, CA, Wax, MK. DuraPrep and the risk of fire during tracheostomy. Head Neck 2006;28:649–652.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
16. Kim, JB, Jung, HJ, Im, KS. Operating room fire using an alcohol-based skin preparation but without electrocautery. Can J Anaesth 2013;60:413–414.Google ScholarPubMed
17. Joint Commission. Specifications Manual for Joint Commission National Quality Core Measures (2010B). Oak Brook, IL: Joint Commission, 2010. https://manual.jointcommission.org/releases/archive/TJC2010B1/ProphylacticAntibioticRegimenSelectionForSurgery.html. Accessed July 16, 2014.Google Scholar