Skip to content

The Skin Prep Study

Antiseptic Skin Preparation for Preventing Surgical Site Infection at Cesarean Delivery: a Randomized Comparative Effectiveness Trial

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT01472549
Enrollment
1147
Registered
2011-11-16
Start date
2011-09-30
Completion date
2015-06-30
Last updated
2018-08-08

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

Conditions

Surgical Site Infections

Keywords

Preoperative, Antiseptics, Comparative, Cost, Effectiveness

Brief summary

The investigators propose a randomized controlled clinical trial to determine the comparative effectiveness of chlorhexidine-alcohol and iodine-alcohol preoperative skin preparation for preventing surgical site infections at cesarean section. While estimates vary, surgical site infections complicate up to 5 - 10% of all cesarean sections and result in significant human suffering and excess health care costs. Interventions such as preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis reduce surgical site infections by 60%, but the rate of infection remains high. There is therefore a great need to identify and test other potential interventions to further reduce these infections. The skin is a major source of pathogens that cause surgical site infection. Therefore, optimizing preoperative skin antisepsis has the potential to decrease postoperative surgical site infections. There is paucity of evidence to guide the choice of antiseptic for skin preparation at cesarean section. To date, only two underpowered trials have been published comparing two methods of preoperative skin preparation at cesarean section. A recent randomized trial in adults undergoing clean-contaminated mostly general surgical procedures demonstrated a 41% reduction in surgical site infection with the use of chlorhexidine-alcohol when compared to the more commonly used povidone-iodine. While it is plausible that findings from trials in other clean-contaminated surgical procedures may apply to cesarean sections, physiological changes in pregnancy, the peculiar dual microbial source for cesarean-related infections and the hormone-mediated immune-modulation in pregnancy make the validity of such extrapolation uncertain. The study has the following specific aims: Primary Aim: To test the hypothesis that preoperative chlorhexidine-alcohol skin preparation at cesarean section significantly reduces surgical site infections compared to iodine-alcohol. Secondary Aim 1: To test the hypothesis that preoperative chlorhexidine-alcohol skin preparation at cesarean section significantly reduces bacterial contamination at the surgical site compared to iodine-alcohol. Secondary Aim 2: To determine clinical outcomes and medical costs associated with cesarean-related infections and quantify potential cost savings attributable to use of chlorhexidine-alcohol for preoperative skin preparation at cesarean section.

Detailed description

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS This will be a randomized controlled clinical trial aimed at determining the comparative effectiveness of chlorhexidine-alcohol and iodine-alcohol preoperative skin preparation for preventing surgical site infection at cesarean section. The investigators will use broad inclusion criteria and analyze all the main outcomes by the intent-to-treat principle. This approach will allow a more conservative estimate of differences between groups and allow a better estimate of effectiveness and public health implications of practice change rather than a pure estimate of efficacy alone. Randomization and Treatment: Enrolled patients will be randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio using computer-generated randomization sequence to the two skin preparation methods. Blinding: Blinding both patients and physicians to the antiseptic used for skin preparation (double-blinding) would be ideal. However, it is not feasible in this trial. First, most patients can determine whether they were assigned to chlorhexidine or iodine, as the two antiseptics are of different colors and leave a stain on the skin (pink or brown, respectively). Second, physicians are often in the operating room when the skin is being prepared for cesarean section and will know which antiseptic is used. We will minimize systematic bias by using the same standard procedures of skin preparation, skin culture and assessment of outcomes. All diagnoses of surgical site infection will be verified by chart review using the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) National Nosocomial Infections Surveillance System criteria. The principal investigator will verify the diagnoses without knowledge of the group to which the patients were assigned. PRIMARY AIM: Outcome measures-Primary outcome-Proportion of subjects with surgical site infection (superficial incisional \[skin, subcutaneous layer\] or deep incisional \[fascia, muscle\]) within 30 days of cesarean delivery. Surgical site infection will be based on diagnosis by the treating physician and verified by chart review in accordance with the CDC Nosocomial Infections Surveillance System definitions. Secondary outcomes-Length of hospital stay, number of office visits and re-admissions for infection-related complications, endometritis, positive culture from wound culture, skin irritation and allergic reactions. Methods-Subjects will undergo cesarean delivery based on the technique selected by the surgeon. The circulating nurse will record information on key variables known to be related to surgical site infection: antibiotic administration (type and timing), type of cesarean section (scheduled or emergent), status of membranes (ruptured or unruptured), duration of surgery, depth of subcutaneous layer (closed or not closed) and skin closure method (subcuticular suture or staples) on data collection forms. Demographic (age, race, socioeconomic status), obstetric (parity, gestational age, indication for cesarean section, cervical dilation at time of cesarean section, presence of chorioamnionitis, surgical complications) and neonatal (birth weight, Apgar score, cord pH) data will be abstracted from the patients chart. Subjects will be contacted once, up to 30 days from delivery, to assess symptoms of cesarean-related infections. Patients who report symptoms will be directed to follow up in the emergency department or with their physician to be evaluated for surgical site infection. Wound swabs will be taken for aerobic and anaerobic cultures in all subjects who present at Barnes-Jewish Hospital with wound infection. Medical records will be obtained from treating physicians to determine the diagnosis at each postoperative office visit or readmission within 30 days of cesarean section. Statistical Analysis: Data analyses will be based on the intent-to-treat principle. The primary outcome (proportion of subjects with surgical site infection) and the other categorical variables will be compared across groups using the chi-squared test. Fisher's exact test will be used for variables in which expected numbers in any of the cells in 2 x 2 tables is \<5. We will calculate 95% confidence intervals around the differences in proportions and the relative risk of surgical site infection. Distribution of continuous variables will be evaluated by visual inspection of histograms and the Kolmogorov-smirnov test. Normally distributed variables will be compared using the unpaired t-tests. If variables are not normally distributed, log transformation will be used in an attempt to achieve normal distribution. If the data is still skewed after log transformation the Mann-Whitney U test will be used to compare groups. It is anticipated that baseline characteristics will be similar in the two groups. In the event that the groups are unbalanced with regards to variables significantly associated with the primary outcome, supplemental analyses will be performed using stratification on the individual variables and multivariable logistic regression adjusting for multiple covariates. Planned subgroup analysis will be performed for: i. scheduled and elective cesarean sections, iii. obese and normal weight women, iii. Subcuticular and staple closure, and iv. women with and without chronic medical conditions (diabetes, chronic hypertension, renal disease). Interaction tests will be used to determine if the effectiveness of the skin preparation methods differ across these subgroups. Tests with p \<0.05 will be considered statistically significant. Analyses will be performed using Stata version 10.0 (Stata Corp., College Station, TX). Sample Size Estimation: The sample size estimation for the primary aim is based on an assumed baseline surgical site infection rate of 8% and an anticipated clinically significant 50% reduction in surgical site infection. To have 80% power to detect 50% difference in a two-tailed chi-squared test with α of 0.05, a total of 1084 subjects will need to be randomized. To accommodate a 10% drop out rate, 1, 192 subjects will be enrolled (596 chlorhexidine, 596 iodine). SECONDARY AIM #1: To test the hypothesis that preoperative chlorhexidine-alcohol skin preparation at cesarean section significantly reduces bacterial contamination at the surgical site compared to povidone-iodine Primary outcome-Proportion of subjects with surgical site skin contamination after antiseptic preparation. Contamination will be defined as ≥5000 total colony-forming units per milliliter on aerobic or anaerobic culture. Secondary outcomes-Types of bacteria cultured before and after skin preparation, concordance of bacteria at surgical site following preoperative skin preparation with bacteria in postoperative surgical site infections. Methods-Two skin swabs will be taken transversely across the suprapubic area, 2 finger breadths above the symphysis pubis immediately before, and 5 minutes after skin preparation. These swabs will be cultured under aerobic and anaerobic conditions. To ensure that the groups at high risk for surgical site infections are well represented, we will ensure that obese women, diabetics and women undergoing emergent cesarean deliveries are adequately sample and randomized. Statistical Analysis-Data analyses will be based on the intent-to-treat principle. The primary outcome (proportion of subjects with surgical site skin contamination after skin preparation) and the other categorical variables will be compared across groups using the chi-squared test. Fisher's exact test will be used for variables in which expected numbers in any of the cells in 2 x 2 tables is \<5. Tests with p \<0.05 will be considered significant. We will also conduct stratified analysis based on the different risk groups. Finally, we will calculate 95% confidence intervals around the difference in proportions and relative risk of skin contamination after antiseptic skin preparation. Analyses will be performed using Stata version 11.0 (Stata Corp., College Station, TX). Sample Size Estimation-The sample size estimation for secondary aim #1 is based on the primary outcome of skin contamination following skin preparation. A meta-analysis of data from non-obstetric surgical procedures suggest a contamination rate of 39% after preoperative skin preparation with iodine and a rate of 18% after the use of chlorhexidine \[17\]. On the basis of an assumed contamination rate of 39% in the iodine group and 50% difference in skin contamination as clinically significant, a total of 168 subjects will be needed (84 chlorhexidine, 84 iodine) to have 80% power in a two-tailed chi-squared test and α of 0.05. SECONDARY AIM #2 The outcome for secondary aim#2 is attributable cost saving (if any), defined as the difference in total costs between women with preoperative iodine and chlorhexidine skin preparation. Methods/Data Analysis-A cost-benefit decision analysis model will be developed depicting the decision of whether to use chlorhexidine or iodine for a patient undergoing cesarean section. The cost of implementing each strategy will include the purchase costs of the antiseptic agents. For each antisepsis strategy, the patient would then have a probability of subsequently developing surgical site infection based on results of the randomized trial under the primary aim. We will calculate cost incurred by patients who did and did not develop an infection. Costs will be obtained from the Barnes-Jewish Hospital cost accounting database for the surgical admission and any readmission to the hospital and office visits within 30 days after cesarean section. Cost savings, if any, will be the difference between the costs in the two groups. The cost-benefit analysis will be performed using TreeAge Pro 2009 (TreeAge Software). Sample Size Estimation-No formal sample size estimation is made for secondary aim #2. The cost-benefit analysis will be based on outcomes among the subjects enrolled under secondary aim #2.

Interventions

DRUGIodine-alcohol

Skin preparation with 8.3% povidone-iodine with 72.5% alcohol (Prevail-FX, Cardinal Health) preoperative skin preparation.

Skin preparation with 2% chlorhexidine gluconate with 70% alcohol (ChloraPrep, Cardinal Health) preoperative skin preparation

Sponsors

Washington University School of Medicine
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
PREVENTION
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
FEMALE
Healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

* Women undergoing cesarean delivery at Barnes-Jewish Hospital.

Exclusion criteria

* Inability to obtain consent; allergy to chlorhexidine, alcohol, iodine, shellfish; and evidence of infection adjacent to operative site.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Number of Participants With Surgical Site Infection30 daysSuperficial or deep surgical-site infection within 30 days after cesarean delivery, on the basis of the National Healthcare Safety Network definitions of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
Number of Participants With Re-admissions or Office Visits for Wound-related Problems30 days
Number of Participants With Endometritis30 days
Number of Participants With Skin Irritation30 days
Length of Hospital Stay30 days
Number of Participants With Skin Contamination After Skin Prep1 day
Cost Savings30 days
Number of Participants With Allergic Reaction30 days

Countries

United States

Participant flow

Recruitment details

In this single-center, randomized, controlled trial, a total of 1147 patients were enrolled from September 2011 through June 2015.

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Chlorhexidine-alcohol
2% chlorhexidine gluconate with 70% alcohol (ChloraPrep, Cardinal Health) Chlorhexidine-alcohol: Skin preparation with 2% chlorhexidine gluconate with 70% alcohol (ChloraPrep, Cardinal Health) preoperative skin preparation
572
Iodine-alcohol
8.3% povidone-iodine with 72.5% alcohol (Prevail-FX, Cardinal Health) Iodine-alcohol: Skin preparation with 8.3% povidone-iodine with 72.5% alcohol (Prevail-FX, Cardinal Health) preoperative skin preparation.
575
Total1,147

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicChlorhexidine-alcoholIodine-alcoholTotal
Age, Continuous28.3 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 5.8
28.4 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 5.8
28.4 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 5.8
Body mass index35.1 kg/m2
STANDARD_DEVIATION 8.9
34.1 kg/m2
STANDARD_DEVIATION 8.1
34.6 kg/m2
STANDARD_DEVIATION 8.5
Region of Enrollment
United States
572 participants575 participants1147 participants
Scheduled cesarean334 Participants335 Participants669 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
572 Participants575 Participants1147 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
0 / 5720 / 575
other
Total, other adverse events
15 / 57215 / 575
serious
Total, serious adverse events
0 / 5720 / 575

Outcome results

Primary

Number of Participants With Surgical Site Infection

Superficial or deep surgical-site infection within 30 days after cesarean delivery, on the basis of the National Healthcare Safety Network definitions of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Time frame: 30 days

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Chlorhexidine-alcoholNumber of Participants With Surgical Site Infection23 Participants
Iodine-alcoholNumber of Participants With Surgical Site Infection42 Participants
p-value: 0.0295% CI: [0.34, 0.9]Chi-squared
Secondary

Cost Savings

Time frame: 30 days

Population: Cost data was not collected because it as not logistically feasible.

Secondary

Length of Hospital Stay

Time frame: 30 days

ArmMeasureValue (MEDIAN)
Chlorhexidine-alcoholLength of Hospital Stay4 days
Iodine-alcoholLength of Hospital Stay4 days
p-value: 0.24Wilcoxon (Mann-Whitney)
Secondary

Number of Participants With Allergic Reaction

Time frame: 30 days

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Chlorhexidine-alcoholNumber of Participants With Allergic Reaction2 Participants
Iodine-alcoholNumber of Participants With Allergic Reaction1 Participants
p-value: 0.5695% CI: [0.18, 22.11]Fisher Exact
Secondary

Number of Participants With Endometritis

Time frame: 30 days

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Chlorhexidine-alcoholNumber of Participants With Endometritis8 Participants
Iodine-alcoholNumber of Participants With Endometritis11 Participants
p-value: 0.4995% CI: [0.3, 1.8]Chi-squared
Secondary

Number of Participants With Re-admissions or Office Visits for Wound-related Problems

Time frame: 30 days

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Chlorhexidine-alcoholNumber of Participants With Re-admissions or Office Visits for Wound-related Problems19 Participants
Iodine-alcoholNumber of Participants With Re-admissions or Office Visits for Wound-related Problems25 Participants
p-value: 0.3795% CI: [0.43, 1.37]Chi-squared
Secondary

Number of Participants With Skin Contamination After Skin Prep

Time frame: 1 day

Population: The skin samples collected could not be processed for financial reasons.

Secondary

Number of Participants With Skin Irritation

Time frame: 30 days

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Chlorhexidine-alcoholNumber of Participants With Skin Irritation0 Participants
Iodine-alcoholNumber of Participants With Skin Irritation3 Participants
p-value: 0.08Fisher Exact

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Mar 2, 2026