Summaries for Patients |

Antiseptics To Prevent Infection from Intravascular Catheters FREE

[+] Article, Author, and Disclosure Information

The summary below is from the full report titled “Chlorhexidine Compared with Povidone-Iodine Solution for Vascular Catheter-Site Care: A Meta-Analysis.” It appears in the 4 June 2002 issue of Annals of Internal Medicine (volume 136, pages 792-801). The authors are N Chaiyakunapruk, DL Veenstra, BA Lipsky, and S Saint.

Ann Intern Med. 2002;136(11):I26. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-136-11-200206040-00002
Text Size: A A A

What is the problem and what is known about it so far?

Catheters are small, flexible plastic tubes. They are commonly inserted into veins or arteries (intravascularly) to deliver fluid or drugs directly into the bloodstream or to help perform special tests. Intravascular catheters are normally inserted through the skin. The skin's surface has bacteria that can cause infection. Antiseptic preparations are used to clean the skin around the area where catheters are inserted. These preparations contain chemicals that kill or prevent growth of bacteria. The main aims of antiseptic use are to “disinfect skin” and to stop bacteria from entering the bloodstream and causing serious infection. There are many kinds of antiseptics. Two types that are used in many hospitals are chlorhexidine gluconate and povidone-iodine. Several studies have compared the ability of these two preparations to prevent serious infection from occurring with intravascular catheter use.

Why did the researchers do this particular study?

To find out which of two antiseptic preparations, chlorhexidine gluconate or povidone-iodine, is better at preventing infection in persons with intravascular catheters.

Who was studied?

Rather than perform another study themselves, the researchers used information from eight previously published studies that compared the two preparations. All of the patients in the studies were hospitalized adults. Five studies included only patients from intensive care units.

How was the study done?

The eight studies were all randomized trials that directly compared chlorhexidine gluconate with povidone-iodine for catheter-site care. The studies involved 4143 intravascular catheters. The researchers reviewed the studies to determine the number of bloodstream infections that occurred in patients who had had their skin disinfected with either preparation. They combined the results from all of the studies using a special analysis method (meta-analysis).

What did the researchers find?

Chlorhexidine gluconate cut the rate of bloodstream infections in half compared with povidone-iodine (about 1% vs. about 2%).

What were the limitations of the study?

Different types of chlorhexidine gluconate preparations were used in the studies. We cannot tell whether one type is better than another. The eight trials used different definitions of bloodstream infections. Some definitions were less precise than others.

What are the implications of the study?

Compared with povidone-iodine, chlorhexidine gluconate solution reduces the risk for intravascular catheter–related bloodstream infections in hospitalized patients by about 50% (from about 2% to about 1%).





Citing articles are presented as examples only. In non-demo SCM6 implementation, integration with CrossRef’s "Cited By" API will populate this tab (http://www.crossref.org/citedby.html).


Submit a Comment/Letter
Submit a Comment/Letter

Summary for Patients

Clinical Slide Sets

Terms of Use

The In the Clinic® slide sets are owned and copyrighted by the American College of Physicians (ACP). All text, graphics, trademarks, and other intellectual property incorporated into the slide sets remain the sole and exclusive property of the ACP. The slide sets may be used only by the person who downloads or purchases them and only for the purpose of presenting them during not-for-profit educational activities. Users may incorporate the entire slide set or selected individual slides into their own teaching presentations but may not alter the content of the slides in any way or remove the ACP copyright notice. Users may make print copies for use as hand-outs for the audience the user is personally addressing but may not otherwise reproduce or distribute the slides by any means or media, including but not limited to sending them as e-mail attachments, posting them on Internet or Intranet sites, publishing them in meeting proceedings, or making them available for sale or distribution in any unauthorized form, without the express written permission of the ACP. Unauthorized use of the In the Clinic slide sets will constitute copyright infringement.


Want to Subscribe?

Learn more about subscription options

Related Articles
Topic Collections
PubMed Articles
Forgot your password?
Enter your username and email address. We'll send you a reminder to the email address on record.