ArticleAnnals of intensive care2015
Efficacy of chlorhexidine bathing for reducing healthcare associated bloodstream infections: a meta-analysis.
Article in Annals of intensive care, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Effect of 2% Chlorhexidine Bathing on the Incidence of Hospital-Acquired Infection and Multidrug-Resistant Organisms in Adult Intensive Care Unit Patients: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis].Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing · 2021Pooled it
- Chlorhexidine bathing of the critically ill for the prevention of hospital-acquired infection.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
- The impact of chlorhexidine bathing on hospital-acquired bloodstream infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC infectious diseases · 2019Pooled it
- Chlorhexidine Gluconate Treatment Adherence Among Nurses and Patients to Reduce Central Line-Associated Bloodstream Infections.Clinical journal of oncology nursing · 2025Review
- Chlorhexidine: Patient Bathing and Infection Prevention.Current infectious disease reports · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to determine if daily bathing with chlorhexidine decreased hospital-acquired BSIs in critically ill patients.
methodsWe searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases to identify randomized controlled trials that compared daily bathing with chlorhexidine and a control in critically ill patients.
resultsThis meta-analysis included five RCTs. The overall incidence of measured hospital-acquired BSIs was significantly lower in the chlorhexidine group compared to the controls 0.69 (95 % CI 0.55-0.85; P < 0.001; I (2) = 57.7 %). Gram-positive-induced (RR = 0.49, 95 % CI 0.41-0.58; P = 0.000; I (2) = 0.0 %) bacteremias were significantly less common in the chlorhexidine group. The incidence of MRSA bacteremias (RR 0.63; 95 % CI 0.44-0.91; P = 0.006; I (2) = 30.3 %) was significantly lower among patients who received mupirocin in addition to chlorhexidine bathing than among those who did not routinely receive mupirocin.
conclusionsDaily bathing with chlorhexidine may be effective to reduce the incidence of hospital-acquired BSIs. However, chlorhexidine bathing alone may be of limited utility in reduction of MRSA bacteremia; intranasal mupirocin may also be required. This meta-analysis has several limitations. Future large-scale international multicenter studies are needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.