Evaluation of surgical scrub methods for large animal surgeons
- PMID: 9381663
- DOI: 10.1111/j.1532-950x.1997.tb01697.x
Evaluation of surgical scrub methods for large animal surgeons
Abstract
Objective: The objective of this study was to determine the effectiveness of a 5-minute surgical scrub using either a one-brush or a two-brush technique in clean and dirty surgical procedures, and to compare the efficacy of povidone iodine with chlorhexidine as surgical scrub solutions.
Study design: Prospective clinical trial.
Methods: Nine veterinarians scrubbed their hands on eight separate occasions using either povidone iodine or chlorhexidine gluconate. A 5-minute scrub and either a one-brush or two-brush technique used in both clean and dirty operations were evaluated by taking glove juice samples before scrubbing, immediately after scrubbing, and 30, 60, 90, and 120 minutes after scrubbing. Glove juice samples were cultured and the colonies were counted. Percent reductions of bacterial forming units were calculated for all eight scrub procedures.
Results: All scrub procedures provided an adequate percent reduction in colony forming units (CFU) during the 2-hour sampling period. The number of CFU immediately after scrubbing were significantly lower than prescrub. At 120 minutes, there were significantly fewer CFUs than presecrub, but there were more than immediately after scrubbing. No significant difference in reduction in CFUs were detected between one-brush and two-brush techniques. Both chlorhexidine and povidone iodine scrub solutions adequately reduced bacterial colony counts for 120 minutes after scrubbing regardless of the amount of contamination before skin preparation.
Conclusions: Bacterial counts after a hand scrub procedure using a one-brush technique were not significantly different than after a procedure that used a two-brush technique. Povidone iodine and chlorhexidine are equally effectively in decreasing bacterial numbers on the skin, given a variety of contamination levels present before the scrub procedure.
Clinical relevance: Surgeons may use either chlorhexidine or povidone iodine for antiseptic preparation of their hands before surgery. A two-brush technique is not necessary.
Similar articles
-
Comparison of the antimicrobial efficacy of povidone-iodine, povidone-iodine-ethanol and chlorhexidine gluconate-ethanol surgical scrubs.Dermatology. 2006;212 Suppl 1:21-5. doi: 10.1159/000089195. Dermatology. 2006. PMID: 16490971 Clinical Trial.
-
Preoperative Hand Decontamination in Ophthalmic Surgery: A Comparison of the Removal of Bacteria from Surgeons' Hands by Routine Antimicrobial Scrub versus an Alcoholic Hand Rub.Curr Eye Res. 2017 Sep;42(9):1333-1337. doi: 10.1080/02713683.2017.1304559. Epub 2017 May 30. Curr Eye Res. 2017. PMID: 28557536
-
Antiseptic Effect of Conventional Povidone-Iodine Scrub, Chlorhexidine Scrub, and Waterless Hand Rub in a Surgical Room: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2017 Apr;38(4):417-422. doi: 10.1017/ice.2016.296. Epub 2016 Dec 20. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2017. PMID: 27995837 Clinical Trial.
-
Should surgeons scrub with chlorhexidine or iodine prior to surgery?Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2011 Jun;12(6):1017-21. doi: 10.1510/icvts.2010.259796. Epub 2011 Mar 1. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2011. PMID: 21362729 Review.
-
Antiseptic efficacies of waterless hand rub, chlorhexidine scrub, and povidone-iodine scrub in surgical settings: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.J Hosp Infect. 2019 Apr;101(4):370-379. doi: 10.1016/j.jhin.2018.11.012. Epub 2018 Nov 28. J Hosp Infect. 2019. PMID: 30500384
Cited by
-
Comparison of an alcohol-based hand rub and water-based chlorhexidine gluconate scrub technique for hand antisepsis prior to elective surgery in horses.Can Vet J. 2016 Feb;57(2):164-8. Can Vet J. 2016. PMID: 26834268 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources