Trial reportCMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne2017
Alcoholic versus aqueous chlorhexidine for skin antisepsis: the AVALANCHE trial.
Trial report in CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03551561 (Antisepsis Techniques in Orthopedic Surgical Procedures), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
Antisepsis Techniques in Orthopedic Surgical Procedures: a Comparative Study
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Antimicrobial and Antibiofilm Potential of New Water-Soluble Tris-Quaternary Ammonium Compounds.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- Article
- Comparison of the effect of isopropyl alcohol and chlorhexidine solution rinses on body temperature of female cats undergoing sterilization surgery.Journal of feline medicine and surgery · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPreoperative skin antisepsis is routine practice. We compared alcoholic chlorhexidine with aqueous chlorhexidine for skin antisepsis to prevent surgical site infection after minor skin excisions in general practice.
methodsWe conducted this prospective, multicentre, randomized controlled trial in 4 private general practices in North Queensland, Australia, from October 2015 to August 2016. Consecutive adult patients presenting for minor skin excisions were randomly assigned to undergo preoperative skin antisepsis with 0.5% chlorhexidine in 70% ethanol (intervention) or 0.5% chlorhexidine aqueous solution (control). Our primary outcome was surgical site infection within 30 days of excision. We also measured the incidence of adverse reactions.
resultsA total of 916 patients were included in the study: 454 underwent antisepsis with alcoholic chlorhexidine and 462 with aqueous chlorhexidine. Of these, 909 completed follow-up. In the intention-to-treat analysis of cases available at follow-up, there was no significant difference in the incidence of surgical site infection between the alcoholic chlorhexidine arm (5.8%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.6% to 7.9%) and the aqueous chlorhexidine arm (6.8%, 95% CI 4.5% to 9.1%). The attributable risk reduction was 0.010 (95% CI -0.021 to 0.042), the relative risk was 0.85 (95% CI 0.51 to 1.41), and the number needed to treat to benefit was 100. Per protocol and sensitivity analyses produced similar results. The incidence of adverse reactions was low, with no difference between groups (
interpretationThere was no significant difference in efficacy between alcoholic and aqueous chlorhexidine for the prevention of surgical site infection after minor skin excisions in general practice.
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.