Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-09T22:06:39.504Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Prophylaxis for Caesarean Section: Where to Turn

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 June 2016

Steve H. Dougherty  and
Vickie S. Williams
Steve H. Dougherty
Affiliation:
Texas Tech University
Vickie S. Williams
Affiliation:
Texas Tech University
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. As you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Departments
Information
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology , Volume 11 , Issue 1 , January 1990 , pp. 9
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America 1990

References

1. Galask, RP, Weiner, C, Petzold, CR. Comparison of single-dose cefmetazole and cefotetan prophylaxis in women undergoing primary caesarean section. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1989; 23 Suppl D:105–108.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2. Engel, K, Schmidt, W Sonntag, HG, Kees, F. Comparative clinical and pharmacokinetic aspects of cefotetan versus cefoxitin plus metronidazole in vaginal hysterectomy. Chemioterapia. 1988; 7(4):256–260.Google ScholarPubMed
3. Periti, P, Mazzei, T, Periti, E. Prophylaxis in gynaecological and obstetric surgery: a comparative randomised multicentre study of single-dose cefotetan versus two doses of cefazolin, Chemioterapia. 1988; 7(4):245–252.Google ScholarPubMed
4. Poularas, J, Giamarellou, H, Vlachos, G, et al. The treatment of gynaecological and intraabdominal infections: a comparative study of cefotetan versus netilmicin plus clindamycin. Chemioterapia. 1988; 7(4):253–255.Google Scholar