The role of plastic wound drapes in the prevention of wound infection following abdominal surgery. The effect of incisional plastic drapes and redisinfection of operation site on wound infection following caesarean section. The value of a plastic adhesive drape in the prevention of wound infection. A controlled trial. Preoperative skin preparation of cardiac patients. Plastic adhesive drapes and wound infection after hip fracture surgery. The use of an iodophor-impregnated plastic incise drape in abdominal surgery--a controlled clinical trial. Do plastic adhesive drapes prevent post caesarean wound infection?
A randomized controlled trial has been performed to assess the value of plastic wound drapes in the prevention of surgical wound infection. One hundred and forty-four patients undergoing abdominal surgery were allocated to one of three groups; a control group (A) in which standard cloth towels were applied to the abdominal wound, group B in which an adhesive plastic drape was added and group C in which a plastic ring protector was inserted into the wound. There were 26 cases (18 per cent) of wound infection. The wound infection rate in the plastic drape groups did not differ significantly from that in the control group. Bacteriological culture from a wound swab taken at operation was positive in 32 per cent of the cases. The presence of a plastic wound drape did not influence the positive culture rate. In 68 per cent of wounds which became infected the operative swab was positive as compared with 24 per cent in those not developing a wound infection. Thirteen of the 33 patients (39 per cent) with a positive wound swab subsequently developed a wound infection. In 10 of these 13 cases of infection the operative swab permitted an accurate prediction of the organism responsible for the subsequent infection. In a randomized prospective multicentre study of post-caesarean wound infection among 1,340 women in eight hospitals, the effect of redisinfection of the skin around the incision before skin closure and the effect of adhesive skin drapes were investigated. The overall rate of wound infection with pus was 5.0% (range 3.5-8.9%). The study showed a reduction in postoperative wound infection associated with redisinfection (P = 5.5%), while no benefit from adhesive plastic drapes could be demonstrated. nan Nurses at a large southwestern hospital undertook an initiative to optimize the preoperative skin preparation of patients undergoing open heart surgery. After an extensive review of the literature, a proposal was submitted to and accepted by the surgeons and internal review board of the hospital. High-risk patients were identified before surgery and randomized into groups to receive one of four different skin preps. The incidence of infection was lower in the two groups of patients who were prepped with insoluble iodine, indicating that the type of surgical skin prep could affect whether patients develop surgical site infections. The clinical practice of skin preparation in this hospital changed based on the results. One hundred and twenty patients with acute hip fractures treated operatively were randomized into two groups. In the 'drape' group (n = 65) the operation site was covered with plastic adhesive drape after preparation. In the 'no drape' group (n = 55) the operation site was left uncovered. The two groups were otherwise matched. Swabs for culture were taken from skin adjacent to the wound before closure. The drape group had four positive wound swabs. There was only one positive wound swab for the no-drape group. There was no difference in the post-operative wound infection rates. A prospective randomized clinical trial comparing the use of a new iodophor-impregnated incise drape with a standard skin preparation technique in 1102 patients undergoing abdominal surgical procedures is reported. The effect of the incise drape on wound bacterial contamination and subsequent wound infections is compared. The iodophor-impregnated plastic incise drape reduced the contamination of the wound. In particular, isolates of normal skin organisms were less frequent when the drape was used in clean and clean contaminated procedures. However, no difference was found between the wound infection rates for the patients on whom the iodophor drape was used and those patients on whom the drape was not used. We conducted a prospective randomized controlled double-blind trial at a regional referral centre for the Eastern Cape area, (Livingstone Hospital) to determine whether the use of plastic adhesive drapes intraoperatively would prevent Post Caesarean Section Wound Infection. A total of 620 patients undergoing Caesarean section (CS) were enrolled for randomization in the trial. Fifteen patients were excluded, while 305 received drapes (test group) and 300 did not (control group). Two patients in the control group were subsequently excluded. The primary outcome measure was the presence of Post Caesarean Wound Infection. A secondary outcome measure was the number of days in hospital post operation. The study and control groups were comparable at entry. Results show that 34 patients in the test group (N= 305) developed wound sepsis (11.1%) compared with 30 in the control group (N= 298) (10.1%) (difference not significant; Fisher's exact test 0.6933). Average days spent in hospital postoperatively were similar for both test (infected cases: mean 10.56 SD 3.84; non-infected cases: mean 5.21 SD 1.3) and control groups (infected cases: mean 10.18 SD 3.81; non-infected cases: mean 5.2 SD 0.93) (NS). We concluded that the use of plastic adhesive skin drapes did not avert PCWS or decrease the length of post operative stay in hospital for septic cases.
                Copyright 2001 The Hospital Infection Society.
There was no evidence from the seven trials that plastic adhesive drapes reduce surgical site infection rates, and some evidence that they increase infection rates. Further trials may be justified, using blinded outcome assessment to examine the effect of adhesive drapes on surgical site infection, based on different wound classifications.