ArticleBMJ open quality2020
Implementation of vaginal preparation prior to caesarean section.
Article in BMJ open quality, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionSurgical site infections following caesarean section are associated with significant morbidity. Vaginal preparation is the cleansing of the vaginal epithelium with an antibacterial solution to reduce the bacterial load and therefore reduce ascending genital tract infection. It is recommended by the WHO and a Cochrane review in 2018 concluded that vaginal preparation immediately before caesarean section probably reduces the rates of postoperative endometritis.
objectiveTo implement vaginal preparation prior to caesarean section at Guy's and St Thomas' Hospital NHS Foundation Trust and reduce rates of deep surgical site infections.
methodsThe protocol (included within the appendices) for vaginal preparation prior to caesarean section was developed after reviewing the available evidence. Two vaginal preparation champions, a midwife and a scrub nurse, were selected to help promote and assist in the implementation. The first implementation cycle included elective and category II and III caesarean sections. To ensure acceptability, 20 women were asked to complete a questionnaire following vaginal preparation. Once the intervention was being performed in >85% of eligible women, the inclusion criteria was expanded to include category I caesarean sections.
resultsTwelve months following implementation, vaginal preparation was still being performed in 89% of eligible women. The deep surgical site infection rate is now the lowest recorded in the last 6 years. Vaginal preparation prior to caesarean section was acceptable to pregnant women and no adverse effects were reported.
conclusionsVaginal preparation prior to caesarean section has been successfully implemented at Guy's and St Thomas' Hospital NHS Foundation Trust. This simple, cheap intervention, performed with readily available materials, is still being performed in a high number of caesarean sections 12 months post-implementation. It has resulted in a reduction in deep surgical site infections. Involvement of key stakeholders and the recruitment of vaginal preparation champions were key to success.
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.