To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Bathing intensive care unit (ICU) patients with chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) decreases healthcare-associated infections (HAIs). The optimal method of CHG bathing remains undefined.
Methods:
Prospective crossover study comparing CHG daily bathing with 2% CHG-impregnated cloths versus 4% CHG solution. In phase 1, from January 2020 through March 2020, 1 ICU utilized 2% cloths, while the other ICU utilized 4% solution. After an interruption caused by the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, in phase 2, from July 2020 through September 2020, the unit CHG bathing assignments were reversed. Swabs were performed 3 times weekly from patients’ arms and legs to measure skin microbial colonization and CHG concentration. Other outcomes included HAIs, adverse reactions, and skin tolerability.
Results:
411 assessments occurred after baths with 2% cloth, and 425 assessments occurred after baths with 4% solution. Average microbial colonization was 691 (interquartile range 0, 30) colony-forming units per square centimeter (CFU/cm2) for patients bathed with 2% cloths, 1,627 (0, 265) CFUs/cm2 for 4% solution, and 8,519 (10, 1130) CFUs/cm2 for patients who did not have a CHG bath (P < .001). Average CHG skin concentration (parts per million) was 1300.4 (100, 2000) for 2% cloths, 307.2 (30, 200) for 4% solution, and 32.8 (0, 20) for patients without a recorded CHG bath. Both CHG bathing methods were well tolerated. Although underpowered, no difference in HAI was noted between groups.
Conclusions:
Either CHG bathing method resulted in a significant decrease in microbial skin colonization with a greater CHG concentration and fewer organisms associated with 2% CHG cloths.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.