ArticleAcute medicine & surgery
Clinical application of skin antisepsis using aqueous olanexidine: a scoping review.
Article in Acute medicine & surgery. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison between olanexidine gluconate and conventional antiseptics for surgical site infection in gastroenterological surgery: A meta-analysis.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2025Review
- Comparison of olanexidine versus povidone-iodine as a preoperative antiseptic for reducing surgical site infection in both scheduled and emergency gastrointestinal surgeries: A single-center randomized clinical trial.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2023Article
- Delayed-onset contact dermatitis caused by olanexidine gluconate antiseptic solution: effect of wiping off the remaining drug solution in two cases.JA clinical reports · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Surgical site infections (SSIs) and catheter-related bloodstream infections (CRBSIs) caused by bacteria from surfaces poorly disinfected with chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) and povidone-iodine (PVP-I) are increasing. Olanexidine gluconate (OLG) was developed in 2015 in Japan to prevent SSI and CRBSI caused by bacteria resistant to CHG and PVP-I. This scoping review aimed to identify the knowledge gap between what is known and what is not known about the disinfection efficacy of OLG. We searched MEDLINE through PubMed, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform search database, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the Web-based database of Japanese medical articles for works published to July 18, 2021. Manual reference searches were also carried out. A total of 131 studies were screened. Forty-seven studies were included in this review and classified into two major categories: studies on pharmacological effects and spectrum (
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.