Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27109088›Full record

SynthesisJournal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association2016

Umbilical cord cleansing with chlorhexidine in neonates: a systematic review.

M J Sankar, A Chandrasekaran, A Ravindranath, R Agarwal, V K Paul

Open access · hybridAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
8.5field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. [Guidelines for neonatal skin management in the neonatal intensive care unit (2021)].Zhongguo dang dai er ke za zhi = Chinese journal of contemporary pediatrics · 2021
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Skin care practices in newborn nurseries and mother-baby units in Maryland.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2017
    Review
  16. Review
  17. 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 1 institution in 1 country.

M J SankarNewborn Health Knowledge Centre (NHKC), ICMR Center for Advanced Research in Newborn Health, WHO Collaborating Centre for Training and Research in Newborn Care, Department of Pediatrics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
A ChandrasekaranNewborn Health Knowledge Centre (NHKC), ICMR Center for Advanced Research in Newborn Health, WHO Collaborating Centre for Training and Research in Newborn Care, Department of Pediatrics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
A RavindranathNewborn Health Knowledge Centre (NHKC), ICMR Center for Advanced Research in Newborn Health, WHO Collaborating Centre for Training and Research in Newborn Care, Department of Pediatrics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
R AgarwalNewborn Health Knowledge Centre (NHKC), ICMR Center for Advanced Research in Newborn Health, WHO Collaborating Centre for Training and Research in Newborn Care, Department of Pediatrics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.ORCID 0000-0001-6208-3057
V K PaulNewborn Health Knowledge Centre (NHKC), ICMR Center for Advanced Research in Newborn Health, WHO Collaborating Centre for Training and Research in Newborn Care, Department of Pediatrics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
All India Institute of Medical Sciences · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the efficacy of chlorhexidine application to the umbilical cord in neonates. We searched MEDLINE and other electronic databases, and included all RCTs that evaluated the effect of single or multiple chlorhexidine cord applications on the neonatal mortality rate (NMR) and/or the incidence of systemic sepsis and omphalitis. A total of six RCTs-four community-based cluster RCTs and two hospital-based trials-were included in the review. Of the four cluster RCTs, three were conducted in South Asia in settings with high rates of home births (>92%) while the fourth, available only as an abstract, was conducted in Africa. Pooled analysis by the 'intention-to-treat' principle showed a significant reduction in NMR after chlorhexidine application (four studies; relative risk (RR) 0.85; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76 to 0.95; fixed effects (FE) model). On subgroup analysis, only multiple applications showed a significant effect (four studies; RR 0.88; 95% CI 0.78 to 0.99) whereas a single application did not (one study; RR 0.86; 0.73 to 1.02). Similarly, only the community-based trials showed a significant reduction in NMR (three studies; RR 0.86; 95% CI 0.77 to 0.95), while the hospital-based study did not find any effect (RR 0.11; 0.01 to 2.03). Since all the studies were conducted in high-NMR settings (⩾30 per 1000 live births), we could not determine the effect in settings with low NMRs. Only one study-a hospital-based trial from India-reported the incidence of neonatal sepsis; it did not find a significant reduction in any sepsis (RR 0.67; 95% CI 0.35 to 1.28). Pooled analysis of community-based studies revealed significant reduction in the risk of omphalitis in infants who received the intervention (four studies; RR 0.71; 95% CI 0.62 to 0.81). The hospital-based trial had no instances of omphalitis in either of the two groups. Chlorhexidine application delayed the time to cord separation (four studies; mean difference 2.11 days; 95% CI 2.07 to 2.15; FE model). Chlorhexidine application to the cord reduces the risk of neonatal mortality and omphalitis in infants born at home in high-NMR settings. Routine chlorhexidine application, preferably daily for 7 to 10 days after birth, should therefore be recommended in these infants. Given the paucity of evidence, there is presently no justification for recommending this intervention in infants born in health facilities and/or low-NMR settings.

Indexed as

Infant MortalityAnti-Infective Agents, LocalBacterial InfectionsChlorhexidineDeveloping CountriesHumansInfantInfant, NewbornRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRisk FactorsSepsisTime FactorsUmbilical CordAnti-Infective Agents, LocalChlorhexidine

Identifiers

PMID27109088
PMCPMC4848738
OpenAlexW2342591860

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.