1982
DOI: 10.1016/0195-6701(82)90031-7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A comparison of the use of povidone-iodine and chlorhexidine in the prophylaxis of postoperative wound infection

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
56
0
2

Year Published

1992
1992
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 72 publications
(58 citation statements)
references
References 5 publications
0
56
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…9,18,19 Two other trials found nonsignificant decreases in the number of SSIs with chlorhexidine use, 21,25 1 trial found a nonsignificant increase in the number of SSIs, 23 and 1 trial reported no SSIs in either study group. 20 We found no evidence of publication bias for the outcome of SSI, on the basis of visual inspection of funnel plots (Figure 2), the Egger method ( P = .99), and the Begg method ( P = .43).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 98%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…9,18,19 Two other trials found nonsignificant decreases in the number of SSIs with chlorhexidine use, 21,25 1 trial found a nonsignificant increase in the number of SSIs, 23 and 1 trial reported no SSIs in either study group. 20 We found no evidence of publication bias for the outcome of SSI, on the basis of visual inspection of funnel plots (Figure 2), the Egger method ( P = .99), and the Begg method ( P = .43).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…The one systematic review identified in the Cochrane Library, 17 which evaluated the effect of skin antiseptics in clean surgeries, was excluded because only 1 of the 7 RCTs included in that review evaluated use of chlorhexidine; that RCT 18 was also included in our systematic review. No additional trials were identified after reviewing the reference lists of the included RCTs.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…6 The results are intriguing, but the conclusions need to be tempered, given the inherent limitations of quasi-experimental studies, particularly the lack of random assignment and the difficulty in ascertaining whether statistical significance is due to causal association or an alternative explanation (ie, regression to the mean, maturation effects, and/or inadequate control of important confounders). 7 For this reason, our meta-analysis was limited to RCTs and, therefore, did not include Swenson et al 6 Third, they state that there is significant heterogeneity in the antiseptic formulations, surgeries, and outcomes in the RCTs included in our meta-analysis. To clarify, the purpose of our meta-analysis was to compare the efficacy of chlorhexidine-based formulations with that of iodine-based formulations in decreasing the primary outcome of interest, SSI, and the secondary outcome of interest, positive skin culture results after antisepsis.…”
Section: Reply To Maiwald Et Al and Riccio Et Almentioning
confidence: 99%