Skin preparation for preventing infection following caesarean section

The risk of maternal mortality and morbidity (particularly postoperative infection) is higher for caesarean section than for vaginal birth. With the increasing rate of caesarean section, it is important that the risks to the mother are minimised as far as possible. This review focuses on different f...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Cochrane database of systematic reviews 2014-09 (9), p.CD007462-CD007462
Hauptverfasser: Hadiati, Diah R, Hakimi, Mohammad, Nurdiati, Detty S, Ota, Erika
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:The risk of maternal mortality and morbidity (particularly postoperative infection) is higher for caesarean section than for vaginal birth. With the increasing rate of caesarean section, it is important that the risks to the mother are minimised as far as possible. This review focuses on different forms and methods for preoperative skin preparation to prevent infection. To compare the effects of different agent forms and methods of preoperative skin preparation for preventing postcaesarean infection. We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (26 June 2014) and the reference lists of all included studies and review articles. Randomised and quasi-randomised trials, including cluster-randomised trials, evaluating any type of preoperative skin preparation agents, forms and methods of application for caesarean section. Three review authors independently assessed all potential studies for inclusion, assessed risk of bias and extracted the data using a predesigned form. Data were checked for accuracy. We included six trials with a total of 1522 women. No difference was found in the primary outcomes of either wound infection or endometritis. Two trials of 1294 women, compared drape with no drape (one trial using iodine and the other using chlorhexidine) and found no significant difference in wound infection (risk ratio (RR) 1.29; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.97 to 1.71). One trial of 79 women comparing alcohol scrub and iodophor drape with iodophor scrub without drape reported no wound infection in either group. One trial of 50 women comparing parachlorometaxylenol plus iodine with iodine alone reported no significant difference in wound infection (RR 0.33; 95% CI 0.04 to 2.99).Two trials reported endometritis, one trial comparing alcohol scrub and iodophor drape with iodophor scrub only found no significant difference (RR 1.62; 95% CI 0.29 to 9.16). The other trial of 50 women comparing parachlorometaxylenol plus iodine with iodine alone reported no significant difference in endometritis (RR 0.88; 95% CI 0.56 to 1.38). One trial of 60 women comparing chlorhexidine gluconate with povidone-iodine reported significant lower rates of bacterial growth at 18 hours after caesarean section (RR 0.23, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.70). No difference was found in the secondary outcome of either length of stay or reduction of skin bacteria colony count. No trial reported other maternal outcomes, i.e. maternal mortality, repeat surgery and re-admission re
ISSN:1465-1858
1469-493X
1465-1858
DOI:10.1002/14651858.CD007462.pub3