Avagard hand antisepsis vs. traditional scrub in 3600 pediatric urologic procedures.

摘要

OBJECTIVES: Avagard is a waterless, scrubless, and brushless hand antiseptic approved by the Food and Drug Administration as a replacement for traditional presurgical brush hand scrubbing. We evaluated the use of Avagard compared with hand brush scrub preparation for inpatient and outpatient pediatric urological operations. METHODS: We evaluated the first 1800 patients for whom we used Avagard as a preoperative hand antiseptic and compared them with the last 1800 consecutive patients for whom we performed traditional antiseptic-impregnated hand-brush scrubbing. All patients underwent a variety of inpatient and outpatient open, endoscopic, and laparoscopic pediatric urological procedures. Patients were monitored postoperatively for wound infection, and patients and surgeon were monitored for side effects. A cost analysis was performed. RESULTS: The incidence of wound infection was 2/1800 (0.11%) in the Avagard group and 3/1800 (0.17%) in the hand-scrub group (P > .99 Fisher's exact test). All wound infections were successfully treated with a single course of oral antibiotics. No side effects for the patients or surgeon were noted, including skin irritations or allergic reactions in either group. The traditional hand scrub is nearly 2 times more expensive per application than Avagard. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of wound infections in pediatric urological procedures is low (0.09%). We observe that Avagard provides comparable hand antisepsis to the traditional surgical scrub in a variety of pediatric urological procedures. Avagard is superior to the surgical hand scrub in cost-effectiveness and time efficiency. Urologists should consider using Avagard for hand antisepsis before surgery.