The Forgotten Role of Alcohol: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Clinical Efficacy and Perceived Role of Chlorhexidine in Skin Antisepsis
Open Access
- 5 September 2012
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Public Library of Science (PLoS) in PLOS ONE
- Vol. 7 (9), e44277
- https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0044277
Abstract
Skin antisepsis is a simple and effective measure to prevent infections. The efficacy of chlorhexidine is actively discussed in the literature on skin antisepsis. However, study outcomes due to chlorhexidine-alcohol combinations are often attributed to chlorhexidine alone. Thus, we sought to review the efficacy of chlorhexidine for skin antisepsis and the extent of a possible misinterpretation of evidence. We performed a systematic literature review of clinical trials and systematic reviews investigating chlorhexidine compounds for blood culture collection, vascular catheter insertion and surgical skin preparation. We searched PubMed, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality website, several clinical trials registries and a manufacturer website. We extracted data on study design, antiseptic composition, and the following outcomes: blood culture contamination, catheter colonisation, catheter-related bloodstream infection and surgical site infection. We conducted meta-analyses of the clinical efficacy of chlorhexidine compounds and reviewed the appropriateness of the authors′ attribution. In all three application areas and for all outcomes, we found good evidence favouring chlorhexidine-alcohol over aqueous competitors, but not over competitors combined with alcohols. For blood cultures and surgery, we found no evidence supporting chlorhexidine alone. For catheters, we found evidence in support of chlorhexidine alone for preventing catheter colonisation, but not for preventing bloodstream infection. A range of 29 to 43% of articles attributed outcomes solely to chlorhexidine when the combination with alcohol was in fact used. Articles with ambiguous attribution were common (8–35%). Unsubstantiated recommendations for chlorhexidine alone instead of chlorhexidine-alcohol were identified in several practice recommendations and evidence-based guidelines. Perceived efficacy of chlorhexidine is often in fact based on evidence for the efficacy of the chlorhexidine-alcohol combination. The role of alcohol has frequently been overlooked in evidence assessments. This has broader implications for knowledge translation as well as potential implications for patient safety.Keywords
This publication has 55 references indexed in Scilit:
- Guidelines for the Prevention of Intravascular Catheter-related InfectionsClinical Infectious Diseases, 2011
- Minimizing Wound Contamination in a ‘Clean’ Surgery: Comparison of Chlorhexidine-Ethanol and Povidone-IodineChemotherapy, 2010
- Blood Culture Contamination Rates after Skin Antisepsis with Chlorhexidine Gluconate versus Povidone-Iodine in a Pediatric Emergency DepartmentInfection Control & Hospital Epidemiology, 2010
- Preventing Surgical-Site Infections in Nasal Carriers ofStaphylococcus aureusNew England Journal of Medicine, 2010
- Chlorhexidine–Alcohol versus Povidone–Iodine for Surgical-Site AntisepsisNew England Journal of Medicine, 2010
- Alcohols for Skin Antisepsis at Clinically Relevant Skin SitesAntimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, 2009
- Effects of Preoperative Skin Preparation on Postoperative Wound Infection Rates A Prospective Study of 3 Skin Preparation ProtocolsInfection Control & Hospital Epidemiology, 2009
- The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and ElaborationPLoS Medicine, 2009
- Systematic reviews and meta-analysis for the surgeon scientistBritish Journal of Surgery, 2006
- Minimising IV site infection while saving time and moneyAustralian Infection Control, 2000