ArticleVeterinary sciences2025
Evaluation of the Preoperative Antiseptic Efficacy of Ozone on Dog Skin in Comparison with Traditional Methods.
Article in Veterinary sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This paper aims to assess the antiseptic capacity of a double-distilled ozonated water solution and compare it to standard presurgical antiseptic protocols based on chlorhexidine and alcohol. Sixty-three canine patients undergoing different surgical procedures (such as thoracic, abdominal, proximal limb, or cervical) were enrolled in the study. Following extensive preoperative clipping of the selected anatomical regions, four standardized skin areas (6 × 6 cm each) were aseptically sampled according to a predefined protocol: Area 1 received soap-based chlorhexidine followed by alcoholic chlorhexidine; Area 2 was prepared using a combination of soap-based chlorhexidine and ozonated water; Areas 3 and 4 underwent presurgical skin antisepsis with a combination of ethyl alcohol and ozonated water, and ozonated water alone, respectively. Two different samples per area were collected using bacteriological buffers in order to evaluate the bacterial count at 90 s and 180 s, respectively. Those samples were sown via streak plating on Petri dishes using PCA (plate count agar) as the medium. The determination of the total mesophilic bacterial count on Petri dishes was used to assess the efficacy of the antiseptics in different areas. Results show that ozonated bidistilled water demonstrated comparable or superior efficacy compared to other antiseptics tested in this study. Its integration into surgical protocols could enhance patient safety while controlling environmental concerns associated with the massive use of chemical antiseptics.
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.