AzTrials
AzTrials

Surgical Site InfectionsNCT01472549

The Skin Prep Study

A study testing Iodine-alcohol and Chlorhexidine-alcohol in people with Surgical Site Infections, run by Washington University School of Medicine at 1 site in United States.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial 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. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Any age, women onlyHealthy volunteers can take part
Conditions the study is for
Surgical Site Infections
What is being tested?
Iodine-alcohol and Chlorhexidine-alcohol
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
1,147 participants
Where
1 siteUnited States
Study dates
Sep 2011to Jun 2015
Phase
Interventional
Are there results?
Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages Any age
  • Women only
  • Healthy volunteers accepted
  • Child, Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • Women undergoing cesarean delivery at Barnes-Jewish Hospital.

Who cannot join

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

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country.

United States1 site
  • Barnes-Jewish Hospital

    St Louis, Missouri, 63108

Other trials in United States

About this study

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

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.

Read more

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.

Read the 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.

Being tested
Iodine-alcohol, Chlorhexidine-alcohol
Keywords
Preoperative, Antiseptics, Comparative, Cost, Effectiveness
Medical subject headings
Surgical Wound Infection

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • Iodine-alcoholDrug

    Also called Prevail-FX, Cardinal Health

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

  • Chlorhexidine-alcoholDrug

    Also called ChloraPrep, Cardinal Health

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

Study groups in NCT01472549
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
Iodine-alcoholActive comparator8.3% povidone-iodine with 72.5% alcohol (Prevail-FX, Cardinal Health)
Receives: Drug: Iodine-alcohol
Chlorhexidine-alcoholExperimental2% chlorhexidine gluconate with 70% alcohol (ChloraPrep, Cardinal Health)
Receives: Drug: Chlorhexidine-alcohol

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. 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.

    Measured: 30 days

Secondary outcomes (7)
  1. Length of Hospital Stay

    Measured: 30 days

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

    Measured: 30 days

  3. Number of Participants With Endometritis

    Measured: 30 days

  4. Number of Participants With Skin Irritation

    Measured: 30 days

  5. Number of Participants With Allergic Reaction

    Measured: 30 days

  6. Number of Participants With Skin Contamination After Skin Prep

    Measured: 1 day

  7. Cost Savings

    Measured: 30 days

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted16 Nov 2011 (estimated)
  2. Study startSep 2011
  3. Primary completionJun 2015
  4. Study completionJun 2015

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Interventional
Phase
Phase N/A
Primary purpose
Prevention
Allocation
Randomised
Intervention model
Parallel groups
Masking
None (open label)
Enrolment
1,147 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT01472549
Sponsor's protocol ID
IRB ID #: 201105161
Status last verified
Jul 2018
First submitted
20 Sep 2011
Last updated
8 Aug 2018
Data monitoring committee
Yes
Individual data sharing
No

Publications

  • Tuuli MG, Liu J, Stout MJ, Martin S, Cahill AG, Odibo AO, Colditz GA, Macones GA. A Randomized Trial Comparing Skin Antiseptic Agents at Cesarean Delivery. N Engl J Med. 2016 Feb 18;374(7):647-55. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1511048. Epub 2016 Feb 4.

    PubMed 26844840
  • Hadiati DR, Hakimi M, Nurdiati DS, Masuzawa Y, da Silva Lopes K, Ota E. Skin preparation for preventing infection following caesarean section. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Jun 25;6(6):CD007462. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007462.pub5.

    PubMed 32580252

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing Iodine-alcohol and Chlorhexidine-alcohol in people with Surgical Site Infections, run by Washington University School of Medicine at 1 site in United States.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 8 Aug 2018. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

Are results available for this study?

Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 8 Aug 2018). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Number of Participants With Surgical Site Infection (time frame: 30 days). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?

On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT01472549, which also lists 2 linked publications.

Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 8 Aug 2018.

Free account

Keep searching with a free account

You’ve used your 3 free searches for this session. Log in or create a free AzTrials account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in