ArticleAmerican journal of translational research2022
Comparison of the disinfection effect of iodophor at two different temperatures on the skin of surgical field and its influence on blood pressure and heart rate of patients.
Article in American journal of translational research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 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
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the disinfection effect of iodophor at two different temperatures on the skin of surgical field and its influence on blood pressure and heart rate of patients.
methodsThe clinical data of 150 patients who underwent surgery in the Seventh People's Hospital of Shanghai University of TCM were collected and divided into two groups based on different disinfection temperatures; the observation group (constant 36°C) and the control group ((24±2)°C), with 75 patients in each. The postoperative disinfection effects of the two groups were evaluated including the disinfection effect, blood pressure, heart rate, body temperature, cold sensation, gastrointestinal reactions, stress response, incidence of complications in the perioperative period, incision healing and satisfaction rate.
resultsThe disinfection efficacy of the observation group was 96.00%, which was higher than that of the control group (81.33%, P<0.01); the blood pressure and heart rate of patients in the observation group after disinfection were lower than those in the control group (P<0.001); the body temperature was higher than that of the control group (P<0.001); the cold sensation was weaker and gastrointestinal adverse reactions were less than those of the control group (P<0.05); the MDA, GSH-PX and SOD levels after disinfection in the observation group were lower than those of the control group (P<0.001); the incidence rate of complications in the observation group was lower than that of the control group (P<0.05) and the incision healing rate was higher than that of the control group (P<0.05). Patients in observation group were more satisfied with disinfection method, disinfection effect, prevention of complications, postoperative recovery and disinfection times than patients in the control group (P<0.01).
conclusionIodophor at constant temperature is more effective in skin disinfection of the surgical field, with little influence on blood pressure, heart rate and body temperature. This helps to reduce the cold sensation of skin, the incidence rate of gastrointestinal adverse reactions and complications, promote incision healing and improve the satisfaction rate of the surgery. It is worthy of wide application and promotion.
Indexed as
Identifiers
35273736PMC8902568W4226061093What 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.