Skip to content

Chlorhexidine Versus Povidone-Iodine for Prevention of Epidural Needle Contamination in the Parturient

Chlorhexidine Versus Povidone-Iodine for Prevention of Epidural Needle Contamination in the Parturient

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT00223002
Enrollment
400
Registered
2005-09-22
Start date
2004-11-30
Completion date
2008-01-31
Last updated
2009-02-16

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Analgesia, Epidural, Anesthesia, Epidural, Asepsis

Brief summary

Infection after epidural catheter placement is fortunately rare. When it does happen, the affected person can become seriously ill. This study examines which skin disinfectant, chlorhexidine or povidone-iodine, decreases the number of bacteria that can be grown from the skin washed with each disinfectant prior to placing an epidural catheter for pain control in labour.

Detailed description

The use of chlorhexidine for skin asepsis for the placement of intravascular catheters is known to decrease the incidence of central line colonization and blood stream infection when compared to the use of povidone-iodine. While the development of an infectious complication following spinal or epidural analgesia, such as epidural abscess or meningitis, is fortunately rare, when it does happen, there can be devastating consequences for the affected individual. The low frequency of infection makes a trial with an endpoint of clinical infection not feasible, however a reduction in skin and needle contamination following attempts at asepsis should reduce the risk of infectious complication. Ongoing work by the authors is examining the skin culture rates following randomized standardized skin disinfection. The purpose of this randomized trial is to compare needle culture rates to further assess effectiveness of skin disinfection following a standardized skin preparation with either povidone-iodine or chlorhexidine in pregnant women requesting lumbar epidural pain relief in labour.

Interventions

DRUGChlorhexidine

sample collected at time of procedure and then analysed for bacterial contamination

Sponsors

University of Saskatchewan
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
SINGLE_GROUP
Primary purpose
PREVENTION
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
FEMALE
Healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

* Parturients requesting lumbar labour epidural analgesia while investigator is assigned to the Obstetrical Anesthesia Service

Exclusion criteria

* Known allergy to either skin disinfectant * Requirement to receive antibiotics prior to placement of lumbar epidural catheter * Immunosuppression of the participant

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
culture-positive rate of epidural needles processed by microbiology labimmediate

Countries

Canada

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026