Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25739381›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2015

Chlorhexidine skin or cord care for prevention of mortality and infections in neonates.

Anju Sinha, Sunil Sazawal, Alok Pradhan, Siddarth Ramji, Newton Opiyo

Open access · greenAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
32.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

29 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 109 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Recent progress in global newborn health: thinking beyond acute to strategic care?Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2019
    Review
  18. The impact of chlorhexidine gluconate bathing on skin bacterial burden of neonates admitted to the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2019
    Observational
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

Anju SinhaDivision of Reproductive and Child Health, Indian Council of Medical Research, Ansari Nagar, New Delhi, India, 110029.
Sunil Sazawal
Alok Pradhan
Siddarth Ramji
Newton Opiyo
Cochrane · GBIndian Council of Medical Research · INJohns Hopkins University · USKasturba Hospital · INMaulana Azad Medical College · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAffordable, feasible and efficacious interventions to reduce neonatal infections and improve neonatal survival are needed. Chlorhexidine, a broad spectrum topical antiseptic agent, is active against aerobic and anaerobic organisms and reduces neonatal bacterial colonisation and may reduce infection.

objectivesTo evaluate the efficacy of neonatal skin or cord care with chlorhexidine versus routine care or no treatment for prevention of infections in late preterm or term newborn infants in hospital and community settings. SEARCH

methodsWe searched CENTRAL, latest issue of The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE (1966 to November 2013), EMBASE (1980 to November 2013), and CINAHL (1982 to November 2013). Ongoing trials were detected by searching the following databases: www.clinicaltrials.gov and www.controlled-trials.com. SELECTION CRITERIA: Cluster and individual patient randomised controlled trials of chlorhexidine use (for skin care, or cord care, or both) in term or late preterm neonates in hospital and community settings were eligible for inclusion. Three authors independently screened and selected studies for inclusion. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently extracted data, and assessed study risk of bias. The quality of evidence for each outcome was assessed using GRADE. We calculated pooled risk ratios (RRs) and risk differences (RDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and presented results using GRADE 'Summary of findings' tables. MAIN

resultsWe included 12 trials in this review. There were seven hospital-based and five community-based studies. In four studies maternal vaginal wash with chlorhexidine was done in addition to neonatal skin and cord care. Newborn skin or cord cleansing with chlorhexidine compared to usual care in hospitalsLow-quality evidence from one trial showed that chlorhexidine cord cleansing compared to dry cord care may lead to no difference in neonatal mortality (RR 0.11, 95% CI 0.01 to 2.04). Moderate-quality evidence from two trials showed that chlorhexidine cord cleansing compared to dry cord care probably reduces the risk of omphalitis/infections (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.84).Low-quality evidence from two trials showed that chlorhexidine skin cleansing compared to dry cord care may lead to no difference in omphalitis/infections (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.39). None of the studies in this comparison reported effects of the treatments on neonatal mortality. Newborn skin or cord cleansing with chlorhexidine compared to usual care in the communityHigh-quality evidence from three trials showed that chlorhexidine cord cleansing compared to dry cord care reduces neonatal mortality (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.92) and omphalitis/infections (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.57).High-quality evidence from one trial showed no difference between chlorhexidine skin cleansing and usual skin care on neonatal mortality (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.23). None of the studies in this comparison reported effects of the treatments on omphalitis/infections. Maternal vaginal chlorhexidine in addition to total body cleansing compared to no intervention (sterile saline solution) in hospitalsModerate-quality evidence from one trial showed no difference between maternal vaginal chlorhexidine in addition to total body cleansing and no intervention on neonatal mortality (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.42). High-quality evidence from two trials showed no difference between maternal vaginal chlorhexidine in addition to total body cleansing and no intervention on the risk of infections (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.16).Findings from one trial showed that maternal vaginal cleansing in addition to total body cleansing results in increased risk of hypothermia (RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.19 to 1.49). Maternal vaginal chlorhexidine in addition to total body cleansing compared to no intervention (sterile saline solution) in the communityLow-quality evidence from one trial showed no difference between maternal vaginal chlorhexidine in addition to total body cleansing and no intervention on neonatal mortality (RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.01 to 4.03). Moderate-quality evidence from one trial showed that maternal vaginal chlorhexidine in addition to total body cleansing compared to no intervention probably reduces the risk of neonatal infections (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.95). These studies did not report effect on omphalitis. AUTHORS'

conclusionsThere is some uncertainty as to the effect of chlorhexidine applied to the umbilical cords of newborns in hospital settings on neonatal mortality. The quality of evidence for the effects on infection are moderate for cord application and low for application to skin. There is high-quality evidence that chlorhexidine skin or cord care in the community setting results in a 50% reduction in the incidence of omphalitis and a 12% reduction in neonatal mortality. Maternal vaginal chlorhexidine compared to usual care probably leads to no difference in neonatal mortality in hospital settings. Maternal vaginal chlorhexidine compared to usual care results in no difference in the risk of infections in hospital settings. The uncertainty over the effect of maternal vaginal chlorhexidine on mortality outcomes reflects small sample sizes and low event rates in the community settings.

Indexed as

Infant MortalityAnti-Infective Agents, LocalBacterial InfectionsChlorhexidineFemaleHumansInfantInfant, NewbornInflammationRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSkinUmbilical CordUmbilicusVaginaAnti-Infective Agents, LocalChlorhexidine

Identifiers

PMID25739381
PMCPMC10638659
OpenAlexW2158694809

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.