Abstract:Abstract Background The application of antiseptic skin agents prior to incision minimizes the rate of surgical site infection. Despite their ubiquity, the optimal skin preparation agent remains uncertain. A retrospective economic analysis was conducted to complement the results from the NEWSkin Prep trial which prospectively compared three preparation agents. Methods A cost and cost-effectiveness analysis was performed from a healthcare service perspective to compare chlorhexidine with 70% ethanol, and aqueous povidone-iodine, against povidone-iodine with 70% ethanol. Resource use estimates accounted for hospital admissions, readmissions associated with surgical site infection, outpatient and general practitioner attendances, visits from community nurses and therapeutic consumables. The measure of effectiveness comprised the net difference in number of patients with surgical site infections per 1000 patients. Costs were compared using a two-sample Welch's t-test. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to evaluate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Results The null hypothesis that the mean costs for the trial arms were significantly different was not rejected (Welch's t-test P value: 0.771 for chlorhexidine with 70% ethanol against povidone-iodine with 70% ethanol; and 0.955 for aqueous povidone-iodine against povidone-iodine with 70% ethanol). Based on bootstrap averages, the chlorhexidine with 70% ethanol intervention generated 8.0 fewer surgical site infections per 1000 patients and net cost savings of €151,698 (Euros) per 1000 patients compared with povidone-iodine with 70% ethanol, and aqueous povidone-iodine produced a net cost saving of €37,494 per 1000 patients but generated an additional 11.6 surgical site infections per 1000 patients compared with povidone-iodine with 70% ethanol. The comparison of chlorhexidine with 70% ethanol to povidone-iodine with 70% ethanol was sensitive to the inclusion of cost outliers, while the comparison of aqueous povidone-iodine to povidone-iodine with 70% ethanol was sensitive to the estimated cost per surgical site infection. Conclusion Based on the outcomes from the NEWSkin Prep study, this economic analysis found no definitive evidence in favour of any one of the study comparators. Future model-based economic analyses of alternative skin preparations should critically address the quality of evidence and integrate the results from the NEWSkin Prep study.

Research progress on preoperative skin preparation for patients in department of surgery

Research progress on preoperative skin preparation

Research progress on skin failure at the end of life

Preoperative skin preparation for abdominal surgery in 187 hospitals of China

Evidence-based practice of preoperative skin preparation in patients undergoing endovascular surgery

Research progress of topical anti-scar agents

Influences of preoperative skin preparation methods on incision cicatrisation and infections

Comparisons of the Effects of Topical Anti-Scar Drugs on Post-Surgical Facial Scar Formation: a Clinical Investigation.

Preliminary Discussion on the Critical Problems of Skin Tissue Engineering

To research the skin condition and demand improvement of facial wrinkles younger patients with preoperative

Clinical effect of two different skin preparation methods on infant craniocerebral surgery

Effect of Surgical Hand Antisepsis Methods on Hand Skin Conditions:A Comparative Analysis

Effect comparison of different skin preparations before intraocular surgery

PRELIMINARY CARE

Optimal antiseptic skin preparation agents for minimizing surgical site infection following surgery: cost and cost-effectiveness analysis

Research progress on surgical specimen standardized management

Single versus Double Skin Preparation for Infection Prevention in Proximal Humeral Fracture Surgery

Clinical analysis of incision infections in patients undergoing emergency trauma surgery and prevention measures

Skin Antisepsis before Surgical Fixation of Extremity Fractures

[Bowel preparation before colorectal surgery]

Study on preoperative patient safety management