title: Comparative evaluation of two surgical scrub preparations in cattle.
abstract: One hundred seventeen cattle that had undergone surgery were assigned randomly to two preoperative skin preparation protocols. Group 1 (60 animals) skin preparation was with povidoneiodine soap and isopropyl alcohol, whereas group 2 (57 animals) had skin preparation with chlorhexidine gluconate and isopropyl alcohol. Quantitative microbial culture plates were used to estimate the number of colony forming units (CFUs) before skin preparation (prescrub), after skin preparation (postscrub), after surgery (postoperative), and in room air (environment). A significant decrease in CFU occurred postscrub for both skin preparations (P < .05). Chlorhexidine and alcohol preparation resulted in significantly fewer CFUs (LSMean +/- SE = 2.79 CFU +/- 1.74) and a greater percentage reduction in CFUs (98.64% +/- 2.01) postscrub than providone and alcohol (LSMean +/- SE = 10.27 CFUs +/- 1.51, 93.29% +/- 1.85); (P < .005). Group 2 had a significantly higher frequency of negative cultures postscrub (49.1%) compared with group 1 (18.3%) (P < .001). The number of postoperative CFUs were not significantly different between the two treatment groups. Wound infection frequency for clean surgical procedures was not significantly different between the two skin preparation protocols (group 1 = 9.8%, group 2 = 10.7%), however, infection frequency was significantly higher for surgical procedures with a ventral abdominal approach (5 of 14, 35.7%,) compared with a flank approach (1 of 41, 2.4%) or other approaches (orthopedic procedures) (1 of 16, 6.3%) (P < .05). Both skin preparation protocols were effective and safe in decreasing the skin microflora population of cattle before surgery and although preparation with chlorhexidine gluconate and alcohol resulted in less CFUs immediately postscrub, the frequency of surgical wound infection was similar for both protocols.
authors.affiliation: Department of Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Kansas State University, Manhattan, USA.
authors.forename: A
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Desrochers
authors.forename: G
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: St-Jean
authors.forename: D E
authors.initials: DE
authors.lastname: Anderson
authors.forename: D P
authors.initials: DP
authors.lastname: Rogers
authors.forename: M M
authors.initials: MM
authors.lastname: Chengappa
mesh_terms: D000433:1-Propanol / Q000592:standards; D000818:Animals; D002417:Cattle / Q000601:surgery*; D002418:Cattle Diseases / Q000453:epidemiology / Q000517:prevention & control; D002710:Chlorhexidine / Q000031:analogs & derivatives / Q000592:standards; D004202:Disinfectants / Q000592:standards*; D006235:Hand Disinfection / Q000379:methods* / Q000592:standards; D011206:Povidone-Iodine / Q000592:standards; D011300:Preoperative Care / Q000379:methods / Q000592:standards / Q000662:veterinary*; D015995:Prevalence; D013530:Surgical Wound Infection / Q000453:epidemiology / Q000517:prevention & control / Q000662:veterinary
chemical_list: D004202:Disinfectants; D011206:Povidone-Iodine; D000433:1-Propanol; C010882:chlorhexidine gluconate; D002710:Chlorhexidine