title: Evaluation of surgical scrub methods for large animal surgeons.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  The objective of this study was to determine the effectiveness of a 5-minute surgical scrub using either a one-brush or a two-brush technique in clean and dirty surgical procedures, and to compare the efficacy of povidone iodine with chlorhexidine as surgical scrub solutions.
  
  
  METHODS
  Prospective clinical trial.
  
  
  METHODS
  Nine veterinarians scrubbed their hands on eight separate occasions using either povidone iodine or chlorhexidine gluconate. A 5-minute scrub and either a one-brush or two-brush technique used in both clean and dirty operations were evaluated by taking glove juice samples before scrubbing, immediately after scrubbing, and 30, 60, 90, and 120 minutes after scrubbing. Glove juice samples were cultured and the colonies were counted. Percent reductions of bacterial forming units were calculated for all eight scrub procedures.
  
  
  RESULTS
  All scrub procedures provided an adequate percent reduction in colony forming units (CFU) during the 2-hour sampling period. The number of CFU immediately after scrubbing were significantly lower than prescrub. At 120 minutes, there were significantly fewer CFUs than presecrub, but there were more than immediately after scrubbing. No significant difference in reduction in CFUs were detected between one-brush and two-brush techniques. Both chlorhexidine and povidone iodine scrub solutions adequately reduced bacterial colony counts for 120 minutes after scrubbing regardless of the amount of contamination before skin preparation.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Bacterial counts after a hand scrub procedure using a one-brush technique were not significantly different than after a procedure that used a two-brush technique. Povidone iodine and chlorhexidine are equally effectively in decreasing bacterial numbers on the skin, given a variety of contamination levels present before the scrub procedure.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Surgeons may use either chlorhexidine or povidone iodine for antiseptic preparation of their hands before surgery. A two-brush technique is not necessary.
authors.affiliation: Department of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, University of Tennessee, College of Veterinary Medicine, Knoxville 37901-1071, USA.
authors.forename: P Y
authors.initials: PY
authors.lastname: Wan
authors.forename: J T
authors.initials: JT
authors.lastname: Blackford
authors.forename: D A
authors.initials: DA
authors.lastname: Bemis
authors.forename: B W
authors.initials: BW
authors.lastname: Rohrbach
authors.forename: D E
authors.initials: DE
authors.lastname: Knoll
authors.forename: M K
authors.initials: MK
authors.lastname: Provenza
mesh_terms: D000818:Animals; D000890:Anti-Infective Agents / Q000592:standards; D001424:Bacterial Infections / Q000517:prevention & control / Q000662:veterinary; D002710:Chlorhexidine / Q000592:standards; D015169:Colony Count, Microbial; D006235:Hand Disinfection / Q000379:methods* / Q000592:standards; D011206:Povidone-Iodine / Q000592:standards; D011300:Preoperative Care / Q000379:methods / Q000662:veterinary*; D011446:Prospective Studies; D013522:Surgery, Veterinary / Q000379:methods* / Q000592:standards; D013514:Surgical Procedures, Operative / Q000662:veterinary; D013997:Time Factors
chemical_list: D000890:Anti-Infective Agents; D011206:Povidone-Iodine; D002710:Chlorhexidine