SynthesisBMC infectious diseases2019
The impact of chlorhexidine bathing on hospital-acquired bloodstream infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC infectious diseases, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 63 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effectiveness of chlorhexidine in preventing infections among patients undergoing cardiac surgeries: a meta-analysis and systematic review.Antimicrobial resistance and infection control · 2021Pooled it
- Central-line associated bloodstream infections in intensive care units before and after implementation of daily antiseptic bathing with chlorhexidine or octenidine: a post-hoc analysis of a cluster-randomised controlled trial.Antimicrobial resistance and infection control · 2023Trial
- Trial
- Results of the CHlorhexidine Gluconate Bathing implementation intervention to improve evidence-based nursing practices for prevention of central line associated bloodstream infections Study (CHanGing BathS): a stepped wedge cluster randomized trial.Implementation science : IS · 2021Trial
- Effect of bathing with 2% chlorhexidine gluconate every other day on healthcare-associated infections in the medical intensive care unit.Infection prevention in practice · 2026Article
- Review
- What Can We Learn from Differences in Hospitals' Sepsis Care?American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine · 2025Article
- Chlorhexidine Gluconate Treatment Adherence Among Nurses and Patients to Reduce Central Line-Associated Bloodstream Infections.Clinical journal of oncology nursing · 2025Review
- Exploring facilitators and barriers to daily chlorhexidine gluconate bathing in adult patients undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024Article
- Chlorhexidine gluconate skin levels and organism decolonization: what we know and what we don't know.Infection control and hospital epidemiology · 2024Article
- Risk, Predictive, and Preventive Factors for Noninfectious Ventriculitis and External Ventricular Drain Infection.Neurocritical care · 2024Article
- Article
- Don't just do it-Conducting and publishing improvement science in infection prevention and antibiotic stewardship.Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE · 2022Review
- Chlorhexidine bathing of the exposed circuits in extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: an uncontrolled before-and-after study.Critical care (London, England) · 2020Article
- Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine Position Statement for Central Venous Catheterization and Management 2020.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2020Article
- Disinfectant Activity of A Portable Ultraviolet C Equipment.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019Article
- Susceptibility of livestock-associated methicillin-resistantAntimicrobial resistance and infection control · 2019Article
- Is it cost effective to use a 2% chlorhexidine wipes bath to reduce central-line associated blood stream infection? A quasi-experimental study.The Brazilian journal of infectious diseases : an official publication of the Brazilian Society of Infectious DiseasesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundChlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) bathing of hospitalized patients may have benefit in reducing hospital-acquired bloodstream infections (HABSIs). However, the magnitude of effect, implementation fidelity, and patient-centered outcomes are unclear. In this meta-analysis, we examined the effect of CHG bathing on prevention of HABSIs and assessed fidelity to implementation of this behavioral intervention.
methodsWe undertook a meta-analysis by searching Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, Scopus, and Cochrane's CENTRAL registry from database inception through January 4, 2019 without language restrictions. We included randomized controlled trials, cluster randomized trials and quasi-experimental studies that evaluated the effect of CHG bathing versus a non-CHG comparator for prevention of HABSIs in any adult healthcare setting. Studies of pediatric patients, of pre-surgical CHG use, or without a non-CHG comparison arm were excluded. Outcomes of this study were HABSIs, patient-centered outcomes, such as patient comfort during the bath, and implementation fidelity assessed through five elements: adherence, exposure or dose, quality of the delivery, participant responsiveness, and program differentiation. Three authors independently extracted data and assessed study quality; a random-effects model was used.
resultsWe included 26 studies with 861,546 patient-days and 5259 HABSIs. CHG bathing markedly reduced the risk of HABSIs (IRR = 0.59, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.52-0.68). The effect of CHG bathing was consistent within subgroups: randomized (0.67, 95% CI: 0.53-0.85) vs. non-randomized studies (0.54, 95% CI: 0.44-0.65), bundled (0.66, 95% CI: 0.62-0.70) vs. non-bundled interventions (0.51, 95% CI: 0.39-0.68), CHG impregnated wipes (0.63, 95% CI: 0.55-0.73) vs. CHG solution (0.41, 95% CI: 0.26-0.64), and intensive care unit (ICU) (0.58, 95% CI: 0.49-0.68) vs. non-ICU settings (0.56, 95% CI: 0.38-0.83). Only three studies reported all five measures of fidelity, and ten studies did not report any patient-centered outcomes.
conclusionsPatient bathing with CHG significantly reduced the incidence of HABSIs in both ICU and non-ICU settings. Many studies did not report fidelity to the intervention or patient-centered outcomes. For sustainability and replicability essential for effective implementation, fidelity assessment that goes beyond whether a patient received an intervention or not should be standard practice particularly for complex behavioral interventions such as CHG bathing.
trial registrationStudy registration with PROSPERO CRD42015032523 .
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.