Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2015 Apr 21;2015(4):CD003949.
doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003949.pub4.

Preoperative skin antiseptics for preventing surgical wound infections after clean surgery

Jo C Dumville  1 , Emma McFarlane, Peggy Edwards, Allyson Lipp, Alexandra Holmes, Zhenmi Liu
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Preoperative skin antiseptics for preventing surgical wound infections after clean surgery

Jo C Dumville et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. .

Abstract

Background: Surgical site infection rates in the month following clean surgery vary from 0.6% (knee prosthesis) to 5% (limb amputation). Due to the large number of clean surgical procedures conducted annually the costs of these surgical site infections (SSIs) can be considerable in financial and social terms. Preoperative skin antisepsis using antiseptics is performed to reduce the risk of SSIs by removing soil and transient organisms from the skin where a surgical incision will be made. Antiseptics are thought to be toxic to bacteria and therefore aid their mechanical removal. The effectiveness of preoperative skin preparation is thought to be dependent on both the antiseptic used and the method of application, however, it is unclear whether preoperative skin antisepsis actually reduces postoperative wound infection, and, if so, which antiseptic is most effective.

Objectives: To determine whether preoperative skin antisepsis immediately prior to surgical incision for clean surgery prevents SSI and to determine the comparative effectiveness of alternative antiseptics.

Search methods: For this third update we searched just the Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register (searched 27 January 2015); The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2014, Issue 12).

Selection criteria: Randomised controlled trials evaluating the use of preoperative skin antiseptics applied immediately prior to incision in clean surgery. There was no restriction on the inclusion of reports based on language of publication, date or publication status.

Data collection and analysis: Data extraction and assessment of risk of bias were undertaken independently by two review authors.

Main results: There were no new studies added to the review in the third updateThirteen studies were included in this review (2,623 participants). These evaluated several different types of skin antiseptics - leading to 11 different comparisons being made. Although the antiseptics evaluated differed between studies, all trials involved some form of iodine. Iodine in alcohol was compared to alcohol alone in one trial; one trial compared povidone iodine paint (solution type not reported) with soap and alcohol. Six studies compared different types of iodine-containing products with each other and five compared iodine-containing products with chlorhexidine-containing products.There was evidence from one study suggesting that preoperative skin preparation with 0.5% chlorhexidine in methylated spirits led to a reduced risk of SSI compared with an alcohol based povidone iodine solution: RR 0.47 (95% CI 0.27 to 0.82). However, it is important to note that the trial does not report important details regarding the interventions (such as the concentration of povidone iodine paint used) and trial conduct, such that risk of bias was unclear.There were no other statistically significant differences in SSI rates in the other comparisons of skin antisepsis. Overall the risk of bias in included studies was unclear.A mixed treatment comparison meta-analysis was conducted and this suggested that alcohol-containing products had the highest probability of being effective - however, again the quality of this evidence was low.

Authors' conclusions: 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).

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Allyson Lipp, Peggy Edwards and Alex Holmes received sponsorship from 3M/NATN clinical fellowship to undertake the original version of this review. The findings of the review were not constrained by the sponsoring body. Allyson Lipp has received a consultancy fee for work with an antiseptics manufacturer. The work was unrelated to this systematic review.

Jo Dumville received funding from the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) under its Programme Grants for Applied Research funding scheme. This study presents independent research commissioned by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) under its Programme Grants for Applied Research funding scheme (RP‐PG‐0407‐10428). The views expressed in this review are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health.

Emma McFarlane: none known. Zhenmi Liu: none known.

Figures

1
1
Risk of Bias summary of Included Studies.
2
2
Risk of Bias Graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.
3
3
Mixed treatment comparison meta‐analysis
1.1
1.1. Analysis
Comparison 1 2% iodine in 90% alcohol compared with 70% alcohol, Outcome 1 SSI.
2.1
2.1. Analysis
Comparison 2 PI paint compared with soap (shop bought) scrub and application of methylated spirit, Outcome 1 SSI.
3.1
3.1. Analysis
Comparison 3 7.5% aqueous PI scrub followed by 10% aqueous PI paint compared with 10% aqueous PI paint alone, Outcome 1 SSI.
4.1
4.1. Analysis
Comparison 4 7.5% aqueous PI scrub followed by 10% aqueous PI paint compared with iodophor in alcohol (film‐forming) paint, Outcome 1 SSI.
5.1
5.1. Analysis
Comparison 5 10% aqueous PI paint alone compared with iodophor in alcohol (film‐forming) paint, Outcome 1 SSI.
6.1
6.1. Analysis
Comparison 6 7.5% aqueous PI scrub followed by 10% aqueous PI paint compared with 2% chlorhexidine in 70% alcohol paint, Outcome 1 SSI.
7.1
7.1. Analysis
Comparison 7 10% aqueous PI paint alone compared with 2% chlorhexidine in 70% alcohol paint, Outcome 1 SSI.
8.1
8.1. Analysis
Comparison 8 Iodophor in alcohol (film‐forming) paint alone compared with 2% chlorhexidine in 70% alcohol paint, Outcome 1 SSI.
9.1
9.1. Analysis
Comparison 9 7.5% aqueous PI scrub followed by 10% aqueous PI paint compared with 4% chlorhexidine in 70% alcohol scrub (and paint), Outcome 1 SSI.
10.1
10.1. Analysis
Comparison 10 0.5% chlorhexidine paint compared with PI paint in alcohol, Outcome 1 SSI.
11.1
11.1. Analysis
Comparison 11 0.75% Chlorhexidine and 1.5% cetrimide scrub followed by 1% iodine in alcohol compared with 0.75% Cholorhexidine and 1.5% cetrimide paint followed by 1% iodine in 70% spirit, Outcome 1 SSI.
12.1
12.1. Analysis
Comparison 12 Aqueous versus alcohol, Outcome 1 SSI.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Update of

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

References to studies included in this review

Alexander 1985 {published data only}
    1. Alexander J, Aerni S, Plettner J. Development of a safe and effective one‐minute preoperative skin preparation. Archives of Surgery 1985;120(12):1357‐61. - PubMed
Berry 1982 {published data only}
    1. Berry A, Watt B, Goldacre M, Thomson J, McNair T. A comparison of the use of povidone‐iodine and chlorhexidine in the prophylaxis. Journal of Hospital Infection 1982;3(1):55‐63. - PubMed
Bibbo 2005 {published data only}
    1. Bibbo C, Patel DV, Gehrmann RM, Lin SS. Chlorhexidine provides superior skin decontamination in foot and ankle surgery. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research September 2005;438:204‐8. - PubMed
Ellenhorn 2005 {published and unpublished data}
    1. Ellenhorn JD. Clean Surgery Data Set June 2007.
    1. Ellenhorn JD, Smith DD, Schwarz RE, Kawachi MH, Wilson TG, McGonigle KF, et al. Paint‐only is equivalent to scrub‐and‐paint in preoperative preparation of abdominal surgery sites. Journal of the American College of Surgeons 2005;201(5):737‐41. - PubMed
Gilliam 1990 {published data only}
    1. Gilliam D, Nelson C. Comparison of a one‐step iodophor skin preparation versus traditional preparation in total joint surgery. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research 1990;250:258‐60. - PubMed
Howard 1991 {published data only}
    1. Howard R. Comparison of a 10 minute aqueous iodophor and 2 minute water‐insoluble iodophor in alcohol preoperative skin preparation. Complications in Surgery 1991;10(7):43‐5.
Meier 2001 {published data only}
    1. Meier D, Nkor S, Aasa D, OlaOlorun D, Tarpley J. Prospective randomized comparison of two preoperative skin preparation techniques in a developing world country. World Journal of Surgery 2001;25(4):441‐3. - PubMed
Paocharoen 2009 {published data only}
    1. Paocharoen V, Mingmalairak C, Apisarnthanarak A. Comparison of surgical wound infection after preoperative skin preparation with 4% chlorhexidine and povidone iodine: a prospective randomised trial. Journal of the Medical Association of Thailand 2009;92(7):898‐902. - PubMed
Roberts 1995 {published data only}
    1. Roberts A, Wilcox K, Devineni R, Harris R, Osevala M. Skin preparation in CABG surgery: A prospective randomized trial. Complications in Surgery 1995;14(6):724,741‐4,747.
Saltzman 2009 {published data only}
    1. Saltzman MD, Nuber GW, Gryzlo SM, Marecek GS, Koh JL. Efficacy of surgical preparation solutions in shoulder surgery. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery 2009;91:1949‐53. - PubMed
Segal 2002 {published data only}
    1. Segal C, Anderson J. Preoperative skin preparation of cardiac patients. AORN journal 2002;76(5):821‐8. - PubMed
Shirahatti 1993 {published data only}
    1. Shirahatti R, Joshi R, Vishwanath Y, Shinkre N, Rao S, Sankpal J, Govindrajulu N. Effect of pre‐operative skin preparation on post‐operative wound infection. Journal of Postgraduate Medicine 1993;39(3):134‐6. - PubMed
Sistla 2010 {published data only}
    1. Sistla SC, Prabhu G, Sistla S, Sadasivan J. Minimizing wound contamination in a ‘clean’ surgery: comparison of chlorhexidine‐ethanol and povidone‐iodine. Chemotherapy 2010;56:261‐7. [DOI: 10.1159/000319901] - DOI - PubMed

References to studies excluded from this review

Becerro de Bengoa 2013 {published data only}
    1. Becerro de Bengoa Vallejo R, Losa Iglesias ME, Alou Cervera L, Sevillano Fernández D, Prieto Prieto J. Efficacy of intraoperative antiseptic scrub after nail removal surgery. Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology 2013;27:925‐927. - PubMed
Brooks 2001 {published data only}
    1. Brooks RA, Hollinghurst D, Ribbans WJ, Severn M. Bacterial recolonization during foot surgery: a prospective randomized study of toe preparation techniques. Foot and Ankle International 2001;22(4):347‐50. - PubMed
Brown 1984 {published data only}
    1. Brown T, Ehrlich C, Stehman F, Golichowski A, Madura J, Eitzen H. A clinical evaluation of chlorhexidine gluconate spray as compared with iodophor. Surgery, Gynecology and Obstetrics 1984;158(4):363‐6. - PubMed
Culligan 2005 {published data only}
    1. Culligan PJ, Kubik K, Murphy M, Blackwell L, Snyder J. A randomized trial that compared povidone iodine and chlorhexidine as antiseptics for vaginal hysterectomy. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 2005;192(2):422‐5. - PubMed
Dewan 1987 {published data only}
    1. Dewan PA, Rij AM, Robinson RG, Skeggs GB, Fergus M. The use of an iodophor‐impregnated plastic incise drape in abdominal surgery‐‐a controlled clinical trial.. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Surgery 1987;57(11):859‐63. - PubMed
Eiselt 2009 {published data only}
    1. Eiselt D. Presurgical skin preparation with a novel 2% chlorhexidine gluconate cloth reduces rates of surgical site infection in orthopaedic surgical patients. Orthopaedic Nursing 2009;28(3):141‐5. - PubMed
Geelhoed 1983 {published data only}
    1. Geelhoed GW, Sharpe K, Simon GL. A comparative study of surgical skin preparation methods. Surgery, Gynecology and Obstetrics 1983;157(3):265‐8. - PubMed
Hagen 1995 {published data only}
    1. Hagen K, Treston‐Aurand J. A comparison of two skin preps used in cardiac surgical procedures. AORN journal 1995;62(3):393‐402. - PubMed
Hibbard 2002 {published data only}
    1. Hibbard JS, Mulberry GK, Brady AR. A clinical study comparing the skin antisepsis and safety of ChloraPrep, 70% isopropyl alcohol, and 2% aqueous chlorhexidine. Journal of Infusion Nursing 2002;25(4):244‐9. - PubMed
Kalantar‐Hormozi 2005 {published data only}
    1. Kalantar‐Hormozi AJ, Davami B. No need for preoperative antiseptics in elective outpatient plastic surgical operations: a prospective study. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery 2005 August;116(2):529‐31. - PubMed
Lee 2013 {published data only}
    1. Lee AS, Cooper BS, Malhotra‐Kumar S, Chalfine A, Daikos GL, Fankhauser C, et al. Comparison of strategies to reduce meticillin‐resistant Staphylococcus aureus rates in surgical patients: A controlled multicentre intervention trial. BMJ open 2013;3:9 e003126. - PMC - PubMed
Lewis 1984 {published data only}
    1. Lewis DA, Leaper DJ, Speller DC. Prevention of bacterial colonization of wounds at operation: comparison of iodine‐impregnated ('Ioban') drapes with conventional methods. Journal of Hospital Infection 1984;5(4):431‐7. - PubMed
Lorenz 1988 {published data only}
    1. Lorenz RP, Botti JJ, Appelbaum PC, Bennett N. Skin preparation methods before cesarean section. A comparative study. Journal of Reproductive Medicine 1988;33(2):202‐4. - PubMed
Ostrander 2005 {published data only}
    1. Ostrander RV, Botte MJ, Brage ME. Efficacy of surgical preparation solutions in foot and ankle surgery. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery 2005;87A(5):980‐5. - PubMed
Polk 1967 {published data only}
    1. Polk HC, Jr. Surgical skin preparation. A clinical comparison of two methods. American Surgery 1967;33(3):209‐12. - PubMed
Shindo 2002 {published data only}
    1. Shindo K, Funai S, Kuroda K, Wakano T, Nishimura K. Clinical study on the antiseptic effect of povidone‐iodine solution for the surgical field of digestive tract operations. Dermatology (Basel Switzerland) 2002;204(Suppl 1):47‐51. - PubMed
Silva 1985 {published data only}
    1. Silva JJ, Schmidt A, Rappoport J. Effect of povidone‐iodine vs. iodine on the prevention of surgical wound infection [Efecto de povidona yodada versus yodo en la prevencion de la infeccion de la herida operatoria]. Revista Médica de Chile 1985;113:103‐5. - PubMed
Swenson 2009 {published data only}
    1. Swenson BR, Hedrick TL, Metzger R, Bonatti H, Pruett TL, Sawyer RG. Effects of preoperative skin preparation on postoperative wound infection rates: A prospective study of 3 skin preparation protocols. Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology October 2009;30(10):964‐971. - PMC - PubMed
Vos 2010 {published data only}
    1. Vos CGJ, Hartemink K. Prevention of surgical site infections: chlorhexidine better than povidone iodine. Nederlands Tijdschrift Voor Geneeskunde 2010;154:A1826.
Yoshimura 2003 {published data only}
    1. Yoshimura Y, Kubo S, Hirohashi K, Ogawa M, Morimoto K, Shirata K, et al. Plastic iodophor drape during liver surgery operative use of the iodophor‐impregnated adhesive drape to prevent wound infection during high risk surgery. World Journal of Surgery 2003;27(6):685‐8. - PubMed
Zdeblick 1986 {published data only}
    1. Zdeblick TA, Lederman MM, Jacobs MR, Marcus RE. Preoperative use of povidone‐iodine. A prospective, randomized study. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research 1986;213:211‐5. - PubMed

References to studies awaiting assessment

Nentwich 2012 {published data only}
    1. Nentwich MM, Rajab M, Ta CN, He L, Grueterich M, Haritoglou C, et al. Application of 10% povidone iodine reduces conjunctival bacterial contamination rate in patients undergoing cataract surgery. Euroepan Journal of Ophthalmology 2012;22(4):541‐6. - PubMed
Taneja 2012 {published data only}
    1. Taneja M, Purtill J, Rothman R, Austin M, Parvizi J. Can surgical site infection after joint arthroplasty be reduced?. Surgical infections 2012;13:S10.

Additional references

AfPP 2007
    1. Association for Perioperative Practice. Standards and Recommendations for Safe Perioperative Practice. Harrogate, North Yorkshire: Association for Perioperative Practice, 2007.
AORN 2006
    1. Association of peri‐Operative Registered Nurses (AORN). Standards, Recommended Practices and Guidelines. 1st Edition. Denver: AORN, 2006.
Darouiche 2010
    1. Darouiche RO, Wall MJ Jr, Itani KM, Otterson MF, Webb AL, Carrick MM, et al. Chlorhexidine‐alcoholversus povidone‐iodine for surgical‐site antisepsis. New England Journal of Medicine 2010;362(1):18‐26. - PubMed
Dolan 1995
    1. Dolan P, Gudex C, Kind P, Williams A. A social tariff for EuroQol: results from a UK general population survey. University of York Centre for HealthEconomics Discussion Paper Series (no 138) 1995.
Dumville 2012
    1. Dumville JC, Soares MO, O'Meara S, Cullum N. Systematic review and mixed treatment comparison: dressings to heal diabetic foot ulcers. Diabetologia 212;55(7):1902‐10. - PMC - PubMed
Hardin 1997
    1. Hardin W, Nichols R. Handwashing and patient skin preparation. In: Malangoni MA editor(s). Critical Issues in Operating Room Management. Philadelphia: Lippincott‐Raven, 1997:133‐49.
Health Protection Agency 2011
    1. Health Protection Agency. Surveilance of Surgical Site Infections in NHS hospitals in England, 2010/2011. London: Health Protection Agency December 2011:Available from: www.hpa.org.uk.
Higgins 2003
    1. Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Measuring inconsistency in meta‐analyses. BMJ 2003;327(7414):557–60. - PMC - PubMed
Higgins 2011
    1. Higgins JPT, Altman DG, on behalf of the Cochrane Statistical Methods Group and the Cochrane Bias Methods Group (Editors). Chapter 8: Assessing risk of bias in included studies. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from www.cochrane‐handbook.org. 2011.
Hinchliffe 1988
    1. Hinchliffe S, Montague S. Physiology for Nursing Practice. Physiology for Nursing Practice. Bailliere Tindall, 1988.
Horan 2008
    1. Horan TC, Andrus M, Dudeck MAC. DC/NHSN surveillance definition of healthcare‐associated infection and criteria for specific types of infections in the acute care setting. American Journal of Infection Control 2008;36(5):309‐32. - PubMed
Kamel 2012
    1. Kamel C, McGahan L, Polisena J, Mierzwinski‐Urban M, Embil JM. Preoperativeskin antiseptic preparations for preventing surgical site infections: asystematic review. Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology 2012;33:608‐17. - PubMed
Larson 1988
    1. Larson E. Guideline for use of topical antimicrobial agents. American Journal of Infection Control 1988;16(6):253‐66. - PubMed
Larson 1995
    1. Larson E. APIC guideline for handwashing and hand antisepsis in health‐care settings. American Journal of Infection Control 1995;23(4):251‐69. - PubMed
Leaper 1995
    1. Leaper DJ. Risk factors for surgical infection. Journal of Hospital Infection 1995;30(Suppl):127‐39. - PubMed
Leaper 2001
    1. Leaper D, Orr K. Step: Inflammation and Infection. Royal College of Surgeons of England, 2001.
Leclair 1990
    1. Leclair J. A review of antiseptics. Cleansing agents. Todays OR Nurse 1990;12(10):25‐8. - PubMed
Lefebvre 2011
    1. Lefebvre C, Manheimer E, Glanville J, on behalf of the Cochrane Information Retrieval Methods Group. Chapter 6: Searching for studies. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). In: Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from www.cochrane‐handbook.org..
Maiwald 2012
    1. Maiwald M, Chan ES. The Forgotten Role of Alcohol: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis of the Clinical Efficacy and Perceived Role of Chlorhexidine in Skin Antisepsis. PLoS One 2010;7:e44277. - PMC - PubMed
Maiwald 2014
    1. Maiwald M, Chan ES. Pitfalls in evidence assessment: the case of chlorhexidine and alcohol in skin antisepsis. Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy 2014;69:2017‐21. - PubMed
Malangoni 1997
    1. Malangoni M. Perioperative antimicrobial prophylaxis. Critical Issues in Operating Room Management. Philadelphia: Lippincott ‐ Raven Publishers, 1997:115‐32.
Mangram 1999
    1. Mangram A, Horan T, Pearson M, Silver L, Jarvis W. Guideline for prevention of surgical site infection, 1999. Hospital Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee. Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology 1999;20(4):250‐78. - PubMed
McCluskey 1996
    1. McCluskey F. Does wearing a face mask reduce bacterial wound infection:a literature review. British Journal Theatre Nursing 1996;6(5):18‐20,29. - PubMed
MHRA 2000
    1. Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency. SN 2000(17) ‐ Use of spirit‐based solutions during surgical procedures requiring the use of electrosurgical equipment. http://www.mhra.gov.uk/Publications/Safetywarnings/MedicalDeviceAlerts/S... (accessed 30 April 2008).
NICE 2008
    1. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Prevention and treatment of surgical site infection. NICE 2008.
Plowman 2000
    1. Plowman R, Graves N, Griffin M. The Socio‐economic Burden of Hospital Acquired Infection. London: Public Health Services Laboratory, 2000.
Price 2004
    1. Price PE, Harding KG. Cardiff Wound Impact Schedule: the development of a condition‐specific questionnaire to assess health‐related quality of life in patients with chronic wounds of the lower limb. International Wound Journal 2004;1(1):10‐17. - PMC - PubMed
Reichman 2009
    1. Reichman DE, Greenberg JA. Reducing Surgical Site Infections:A Review. Reviews in Obstetrics and Gynecology 2009;2(4):212‐21. - PMC - PubMed
RevMan 2014 [Computer program]
    1. The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration. Review Manager (RevMan) [Computer program]. Version 5.3. The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, 2014.
SIGN 2011
    1. Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN). Search filters. http://www.sign.ac.uk/methodology/filters.html#random 2011.
Wade 1980
    1. Wade A. Pharmaceutical Handbook. 19th Edition. London: Pharmaceutical Press, 1980.
Ware 2001
    1. Ware JE, Koninski M. SF‐36. Physical and mental health summary scores: a manual for users of version 1.2. Rhode Island: Qualitymetric, 2001.
Warner 1988
    1. Warner C. Skin preparation in the surgical patient. Journal of the National Medical Association 1988;80(8):899‐904. - PMC - PubMed
Webster 2011
    1. Webster J, Alghamdi AA. Use of plastic adhesive drapes during surgery for preventing surgical site infection. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2007, Issue 4. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006353.pub2] - DOI - PubMed
Webster 2012
    1. Webster J, Osborne S. Preoperative bathing or showering with skin antiseptics to prevent surgical site infection. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2012, Issue 9. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004985.pub4] - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources