A ComparativeAnalysis of 4% Chlorhexidine Versus Methylated Spirit as Prophylaxis of Omphalitis and Sepsis in Newborns

Esculapio Pub Date : 2023-11-08 DOI:10.51273/esc23.251319318
Mehwish Akhtar, Lubna Riaz, Asfand Tariq, Araiz Mansoor Naji, Ahmad Zunair Wasim, Maria Javed
{"title":"A ComparativeAnalysis of 4% Chlorhexidine Versus Methylated Spirit as Prophylaxis of Omphalitis and Sepsis in Newborns","authors":"Mehwish Akhtar, Lubna Riaz, Asfand Tariq, Araiz Mansoor Naji, Ahmad Zunair Wasim, Maria Javed","doi":"10.51273/esc23.251319318","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: To compare the effectiveness of 4% chlorhexidine and methylated spirit in newborns for prevention of omphalitis and neonatal sepsis. Material and Methods: This open label randomized control trial was carried out in neonatal unit of Shaikh Zayed Hospital Lahore from 1st September 2020 to 30th August 2021. After meeting the inclusion criteria, 300 neonates were enrolled. In group A 4% chlorhexidine was applied for cord care and in group B methylated spirit was used. Neonates were followed till 10th day of life, none was lost to the study. Careful examination was done for cord separation and for any signs of omphalitis or sepsis. Results: In Chlorhexidine group omphalitis was present in 56(37.3%) patients and in Methylated spirit group 66(44%) patients had omphalitis (p-value=0.240). In Chlorhexidine group 36(24%) patients while in Methylated spirit 50(33.3%) developed sepsis (p-value=0.074). Conclusion: Methylated spirit and 4% chlorhexidine are equally effective in newborns for prevention of omphalitis and neonatal sepsis.","PeriodicalId":11923,"journal":{"name":"Esculapio","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Esculapio","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.51273/esc23.251319318","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To compare the effectiveness of 4% chlorhexidine and methylated spirit in newborns for prevention of omphalitis and neonatal sepsis. Material and Methods: This open label randomized control trial was carried out in neonatal unit of Shaikh Zayed Hospital Lahore from 1st September 2020 to 30th August 2021. After meeting the inclusion criteria, 300 neonates were enrolled. In group A 4% chlorhexidine was applied for cord care and in group B methylated spirit was used. Neonates were followed till 10th day of life, none was lost to the study. Careful examination was done for cord separation and for any signs of omphalitis or sepsis. Results: In Chlorhexidine group omphalitis was present in 56(37.3%) patients and in Methylated spirit group 66(44%) patients had omphalitis (p-value=0.240). In Chlorhexidine group 36(24%) patients while in Methylated spirit 50(33.3%) developed sepsis (p-value=0.074). Conclusion: Methylated spirit and 4% chlorhexidine are equally effective in newborns for prevention of omphalitis and neonatal sepsis.
4% 洗必泰与甲基化酒精预防新生儿猩红热和败血症的比较分析
目的比较在新生儿中使用 4% 洗必泰和甲氧苄啶预防新生儿睾丸炎和新生儿败血症的效果。材料与方法:这项开放标签随机对照试验于 2020 年 9 月 1 日至 2021 年 8 月 30 日在拉合尔谢赫-扎耶德医院新生儿科进行。符合纳入标准的 300 名新生儿被纳入试验。A 组使用 4% 洗必泰进行脐带护理,B 组使用甲缩灵进行脐带护理。对新生儿进行跟踪观察,直至其出生后第 10 天,无一例新生儿退出研究。对脐带分离和任何脐炎或败血症迹象进行了仔细检查。结果洗必泰组 56 例(37.3%)患者出现脐炎,甲基化精神组 66 例(44%)患者出现脐炎(P 值=0.240)。洗必泰组有 36(24%)名患者出现败血症,而甲基化酒精组有 50(33.3%)名患者出现败血症(P 值=0.074)。结论甲基化酒精和 4% 洗必泰对新生儿预防睾丸炎和新生儿败血症同样有效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信