Resumen

Background: Recently, there have been developed new antiseptics for surgical scrub that do not require brushing. One of them contains 1% chlorhexidine gluconate and 61% ethyl alcohol; within its benefits, it may offer a low potential for skin sensitization, as well as cost savings and less use of water. Objectives: To evaluate satisfaction levels, washing time, safety, cost and amount of water between the traditional surgical scrub technique (group A) and brush-free surgical scrub procedure (group B). Methods: One hundred clean and clean-contaminated surgeries with four hundred surgical team members were included. Satisfaction levels, hand-washing time, skin disorders and problems associated with placement of gloves were evaluated. Hands cultures were taken in 20% of the population and the amount of water used by patients in group A was measured. Total costs and wound infections were analyzed. Results: Satisfaction scale in group A was 9.1 + 1.39 and 9.5 + 1.54 in group B (p = 0.004). The mean hand-washing time was 3.9 + 1.07 min in group A and 2.0 + 0.47 min in group B (p = 0.00001). Thirteen patients had dry skin in group A and four in group B (6.5 vs. 2%; p = 0.02). There were ten positives cultures in group A and five in group B (25 vs. 12.5%, p = 0.152). Wound infection rate was 3%. On average, five-hundred eighty liters of water were used by the former group, and the estimated hand-washing cost was lower in the second group. Conclusions: The handwashing technique with CGEA is as effective as traditional surgical scrub technique, and it is associated with less washing time, dry skin, cost and use of water.

Palabras clave: Antiseptic preoperative hand-washing chlorhexidine ethyl alcohol.

2011-05-09   |   937 visitas   |   Evalua este artículo 0 valoraciones

Vol. 62 Núm.6. Noviembre-Diciembre 2010 Pags. 532-537 Rev Invest Clin 2010; 62(6-ENGLISH)