Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28453340›Full record

Trial reportHand (New York, N.Y.)2017

Prospective Randomized Trial Comparing the Efficacy of Surgical Preparation Solutions in Hand Surgery.

Peter Z Xu, John R Fowler, Robert J Goitz

Abstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Hand (New York, N.Y.), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Incidence of Operating Room Fires During Hand Surgical Procedures.The archives of bone and joint surgery · 2022
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Management of Pediatric Distal Fingertip Injuries: A Systematic Literature Review.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2020
    Review
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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Peter Z Xu1 University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, PA, USA.
John R Fowler2 Department of Orthopaedics, University of Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Robert J Goitz2 Department of Orthopaedics, University of Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
University of Pittsburgh · US

Funding

University of Pittsburgh Clinical and Translational Science InstituteUL1TR000005 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI REIS, STEVEN E · 2012 to 2015
$50.8M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000005
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDecontamination of the skin prior to incision is part of the standard of care for any surgical procedure. Previous studies have demonstrated variable efficacy of different surgical preparation solutions based on anatomic location. The purpose of this study is to determine the effectiveness of 3 commonly used surgical preparation solutions in eliminating bacteria from the skin prior to incision for common elective soft tissue hand procedures.

methodsA total of 240 patients undergoing clean, elective, soft tissue hand surgery were prospectively randomized to 1 of 3 groups (ChloraPrep, DuraPrep, or Betadine). Prepreparation and postpreparation cultures were obtained adjacent to the surgical incision and neutralization was performed on the obtained specimen. Cultures were held for 14 days and patients followed for 6 weeks postoperatively.

resultsPostpreparation cultures were positive in 21 of 80 (26.3%) ChloraPrep patients, 3 of 79 (3.8%) DuraPrep patients, and 1 of 81 (1.2%) Betadine patients ( P < .001). There was no difference in the postpreparation culture rate between DuraPrep and Betadine ( P = 1.000).

conclusionsDuraprep and Betadine were found to be superior to Chloraprep for skin decontamination prior to clean elective soft tissue hand surgery. The bacterial flora of the hand was found to be different from those of the shoulder and spine. The clinical significance of this finding requires clinical consideration because the majority of prepreparation and postpreparation positive cultures were of Bacillus species, which are rarely a cause of postoperative infections.

Indexed as

2-PropanolAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAnti-Infective Agents, LocalBacteriaChlorhexidineFemaleHandHand DisinfectionHumansIodineMaleMiddle AgedOrthopedic Procedures2-PropanolAnti-Infective Agents, LocalChlorhexidinechlorhexidine gluconateDuraPrepIodinePovidone-IodineBetadineChloraPrepDuraPreppreparation solution

Identifiers

PMID28453340
PMCPMC5480658
OpenAlexW2462778652

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.