The Efficacy of 0.5 % Chlorhexidine Gluconate in 70 % Alcohol Compared with 10% Povidone Iodine in Reducing Blood Culture Contamination in Pediatric Patients

Main Article Content

Maliwan Sattabud

Abstract

Background: Blood culture is the standard technique for diagnosis of septicemia but the incidence of bacterial contamination is high. This result is longer hospitalization and higher cost. To reduce contamination, antiseptics such as chlorhexidine and povidone iodine are generally used to clean the patients’ skin before taking blood.
Objectives: To evaluate the efficacy of 0.5 % chlorhexidine gluconate in 70 % alcohol compared with 10% povidone iodine in reducing blood culture contamination in pediatric patients.
Setting: Lahansai Hospital, Buriram provice.
Material and methods: This is a prospective study of pediatric patients who were admitted to Lahansai hospital from August 2016 to July 2017 .The subjects were provisionally diagnosed sepsis or bacteremia and blood culture were taken. The patients were classified into two groups according to antiseptic used: 10 % povidone iodine in odd months and 0.5 % chlorhexidine gluconate in 70 % alcohol in even months.
Results: This study include 364 blood culture specimens were collected.189 specimens used 10 % povidone iodine and 175specimens used 0.5 % chlorhexidine gluconate in 70 % alcohol as antiseptic. The results showed the 10 % povidone iodine group had 10.1 % bacterial contamination and 0.5 % chlorhexidine gluconate in 70 % alcohol group had 8.0 % bacterial contamination. However, these results are not statistically significant. The most common contaminated bacteria in the blood culture were Coagulase negative staphylococci (84.9 %).
Conclusion: For blood culture, use 0.5 % chlorhexidine gluconate in 70 % alcohol as septicemia showed lower bacterial contamination than use of 10 % Povidone Iodine.
Keywords: septicemia, Bacterial contamination.

Keywords

Article Details

Section
Original Articles

References

1. McKiernan CA, Lieberman SA. Circulatory shock in children: an overview. Pediar Rev. 2005;26(12):451-60.

2. Hall KK, Lyman JA. Updated review of blood culture contamination. Clin Microbial Rev. 2006;19(4):788-802.

3. Weinbaum FI, Lavie S, Danek M, Sixsmith D, Heinrich GF, Mills SS . Doing it right the first time:Quality improvement and the contaminant blood culture. J Clin Microbiol. 1997;35(3):563-5.

4. Malani A, Trimble K, Parekh V, Chenoweth C, Kaufman S, Saint S. Review of clinical trial of skin antiseptic agents used to reduced blood culture contamination . Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2007;28(7):892-5.

5. Marlowe L, Mistry RD, Coffin S, Leckerman KH, McGowan KL, Dai D, Bell LM, [et.al]. Blood culture contamination rates after skin antisepsis with chlorhexdine gluconate versus povidone-iodinein pediatric emergency departmen. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2010;31(2):171-6.

6. Suwanpimokul G, Pongkumpai M, SuankratayC. A randomized trial of 2 % Chorhexidine tincture compared with 10 % aqueous povidone-iodine for venipuncture site disinfection: Effects on blood culture contamination rates. J infect. 2008;56(5):354-9.

7. เก่งกาจ อุ่นฤทธิ์, พรอำภา บรรจงมณี, อัจฉรา ตั้งสถาพรพงษ์. ประสิทธิภาพของ 2 % chlorhexidine gluconate in 70 % alcohol เปรียบเทียบกับ 10 % povidone iodine ในการลดการปนเปื้อนของเชื้อจากการเพาะเชื้อในกระแสเลือดในผู้ป่วยเด็ก. วารสารกุมารเวชศาสตร์. 2557;53(1):24-31.

8. Barenfanger J, Drake C, Lawhorn J Verhus SJ. Comparison of chlorhexidine and tincture of iodine for skin antisepsis in preparation for blood sample collection. J Clin Microbiol. 2004;42(4):2216-7.

9. Garland JS, Buck RK, Maloney P. Comparison of 10 % povidone-iodine and 0.5 % chlorhexidine gluconate for the prevention of peripheral intravenous catheter colonization in neonates: a prospective trial. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 1995;14(6):510-6.

10. Tepus D, Fleming E, Cox S, Hazelett S, Kropp D. Effectiveness of chloraprep in reduction of blood culture contamination rates in emergency department. J Nurs Care Qual. 2008;23(3):272-6.