Observational study on preoperative surgical field disinfection: povidone-iodine and chlorhexidine-alcohol.

BACKGROUND AND

OBJECTIVES

Surgical site infection (SSI) rate is reported to range around 16%. Preoperative skin disinfection is keystone for SSI reduction. Chlorhexidine-alcohol has been reported to be more effective than Povidone-iodine (PVI). However, in many countries established habits and the inferior costs of PVI restrain the employment of chlorhexidine disinfection kits (ChloraPrep®) for the preparation of the surgical field.

MATERIALS AND

METHODS

The costs of surgical field preparation in clean-contaminated surgery utilizing PVI (Betadine) and chlorhexidine alcohol and the evaluation of surgeon compliance and satisfaction, were studied by a observational study on 50 surgical operations in which surgical field was prepared with PVI checking established guidelines, and on 50 surgical operations in which chlorhexidine-alcohol (ChloraPrep) was employed. The use of auxiliary material was tabulated as well as the timing of the phases of disinfection and the surgeon's opinions.

RESULTS

The use of auxiliary material (gloves, gauzes, paper towels, surgical instruments, small swabs for umbilical cleaning) is associated with the type of disinfectant, with major use of auxiliary materials recorded in PVI disinfection. PVI disinfection does not follow stringent guidelines, in particular waiting for the disinfectant to dry. PVI guidelines are more demanding than those relative to ChloraPrep. The time necessary for the preparation of the field is significantly longer for PVI. Auxiliary material and guideline compliance must be taken into account when calculating costs; the former are direct costs (even though marginal) and the latter can determine major infective risk.

CONCLUSIONS

Chlorhexidine in kits is easier and faster to use than PVI, requires less auxiliary material and has been shown previously to reduce SSI in clean contaminated surgery.