2009Journal of Small Animal PracticeRequires access

The efficacy of chlorhexidine gluconate in canine skin preparation – practice survey and clinical trials

Lisa Evans, T. G. Knowles, G. Werrett, P. E. Holt

Open publisher page 36 citations

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To determine the use in practice and efficacy of different concentrations of chlorhexidine gluconate for canine pre-operative skin preparation. METHODS: Questionnaires were used to establish which antiseptics and techniques were used for patients undergoing elective neutering. In a clinical study, five different concentrations of chlorhexidine gluconate - 0 per cent (tap water, as a control) 1, 2, 3 and 4 per cent - were tested on 50 dogs undergoing elective ovariohysterectomies and orchidectomies. RESULTS: A variety of preparation practices occurred but only 21 per cent of the veterinary nurses surveyed were aware of the concentration and contact time they used whilst preparing animals. The clinical study revealed there was a significant difference (P<0.001) between the different concentrations used. All concentrations of chlorhexidine were significantly more effective than the control tap water. There was a tendency towards increasing efficacy as concentration increased from 1 to 4 per cent but this was not statistically significant. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The lack of significant differences in efficacy between the different concentrations of chlorhexidine gluconate means that current practices may be adequate, although if the chlorhexidine gluconate concentrations and contact times used are unknown, they may be lower than those tested here and, possibly, ineffective, especially if contact times are short.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

OBJECTIVES: To determine the use in practice and efficacy of different concentrations of chlorhexidine gluconate for canine pre-operative skin preparation. METHODS: Questionnaires were used to establish which antiseptics and techniques were used for patients undergoing elective neutering. In a clinical study, five different concentrations of chlorhexidine gluconate - 0 per cent (tap water, as a control) 1, 2, 3 and 4 per cent - were tested on 50 dogs undergoing elective ovariohysterectomies and orchidectomies. RESULTS: A variety of preparation practices occurred but only 21 per cent of the veterinary nurses surveyed were aware of the concentration and contact time they used whilst preparing animals. The clinical study revealed there was a significant difference (P<0.001) between the different concentrations used. All concentrations of chlorhexidine were significantly more effective than the control tap water. There was a tendency towards increasing efficacy as concentration increased from 1 to 4 per cent but this was not statistically significant. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The lack of significant differences in efficacy between the different concentrations of chlorhexidine gluconate means that current practices may be adequate, although if the chlorhexidine gluconate concentrations and contact times used are unknown, they may be lower than those tested here and, possibly, ineffective, especially if contact times are short.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 36 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

OBJECTIVES: To determine the use in practice and efficacy of different concentrations of chlorhexidine gluconate for canine pre-operative skin preparation. METHODS: Questionnaires were used to establish which antiseptics and techniques were used for patients undergoing elective neutering. In a clinical study, five different concentrations of chlorhexidine gluconate - 0 per cent (tap water, as a control) 1, 2, 3 and 4 per cent - were tested on 50 dogs undergoing elective ovariohysterectomies and orchidectomies. RESULTS: A variety of preparation practices occurred but only 21 per cent of the veterinary nurses surveyed were aware of the concentration and contact time they used whilst preparing animals. The clinical study revealed there was a significant difference (P<0.001) between the different concentrations used. All concentrations of chlorhexidine were significantly more effective than the control tap water. There was a tendency towards increasing efficacy as concentration increased from 1 to 4 per cent but this was not statistically significant. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The lack of significant differences in efficacy between the different concentrations of chlorhexidine gluconate means that current practices may be adequate, although if the chlorhexidine gluconate concentrations and contact times used are unknown, they may be lower than those tested here and, possibly, ineffective, especially if contact times are short.

Key concepts: Medicine, Chlorhexidine gluconate, Chlorhexidine, Neutering, Clinical trial, Significant difference, Clinical efficacy, Infection control

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
The efficacy of chlorhexidine gluconate in canine skin preparation – practice survey and clinical trials — Research Paper | ScholarLens