SynthesisAnales del sistema sanitario de Navarra2022
[Chlorhexidine bathing in intensive care units for the prevention of nosocomial infections. A systematic review].
Synthesis in Anales del sistema sanitario de Navarra, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- 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
- Can chlorhexidine gluconate baths reduce fungal colonisation in intensive care unit patients?Antimicrobial resistance and infection control · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to determine the effectiveness of chlorhexidine use patients in adult intensive care units for preventing nosocomial infections. We carried out a systematic review of randomized clinical trials published over the past 10 years. We collected the following data: type of infection, mortality, isolated microorganisms, and multidrug-resistant microorganisms. In two out of the five studies included in the review, bathing with chlorhexidine was ineffective due to low cross-infection rates at baseline and Gram-negative bacteria being the most prevalent type of microorganism, against which chlorhexidine is not as effective. No decline in death rates was either observed. Chlorhexidine bathing was mainly effective in preventing bloodstream infections and those caused by Gram-positive bacteria. Thus, its use may be effective in intensive care units with high prevalence of infections by this type of microorganisms.
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.