Cotton wool v swabs

Re: Cotton wool v swabs

sisterscope1 — Tue, 20 Dec 2011 12:50:38 GMT

Don't worry, if you read the paper, a full 'standard' prep was carried out after the samples were obtained before proceeding with surgery.

Re: Cotton wool v swabs

Rob Watkins — Tue, 20 Dec 2011 09:07:48 GMT

Especially ones that show only a 1/5th of the nurses surveyed were certain what they were applying to the animal...

Re: Cotton wool v swabs

Celine — Thu, 15 Dec 2011 18:36:38 GMT

.[quote user="Rob Watkins"]In a clinical study, five different concentrations of chlorhexidine gluconate - 0 per cent (tap water, as a control)[/quote]

Wow, surgical site prep using only tap water..... charming. I love and hate clinical studies...

Re: Cotton wool v swabs

Rob Watkins — Thu, 15 Dec 2011 11:12:55 GMT

The research is for the Blood Transfusion Service in human patients and will happily provide if you want to PM me.

In the UK there is evidence to show that there is little clarity in terms of what is actually applied and how long it is applied for...

JSAP 2009, 50(9):458-65

OBJECTIVES: To determine the use in practice and efficacy of different concentrations of chlorhexidine gluconate for canine pre-operative skin preparation.

METHODS: Questionnaires were used to establish which antiseptics and techniques were used for patients undergoing elective neutering. In a clinical study, five different concentrations of chlorhexidine gluconate - 0 per cent (tap water, as a control) 1, 2, 3 and 4 per cent - were tested on 50 dogs undergoing elective ovariohysterectomies and orchidectomies.

RESULTS: A variety of preparation practices occurred but only 21 per cent of the veterinary nurses surveyed were aware of the concentration and contact time they used whilst preparing animals. The clinical study revealed there was a significant difference (P<0.001) between the different concentrations used. All concentrations of chlorhexidine were significantly more effective than the control tap water. There was a tendency towards increasing efficacy as concentration increased from 1 to 4 per cent but this was not statistically significant.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The lack of significant differences in efficacy between the different concentrations of chlorhexidine gluconate means that current practices may be adequate, although if the chlorhexidine gluconate concentrations and contact times used are unknown, they may be lower than those tested here and, possibly, ineffective, especially if contact times are short.

Re: Cotton wool v swabs

Siobhan Steven — Wed, 14 Dec 2011 11:38:44 GMT

Not doubting that fact, but this is whats used at Melbourne University, and with the amount of surgeries done vs infections

/ breakdowns it is the best compromise of an effective application for non human patients (not to say that the 2%CHG/70%IPA isn't good for animals, but would need to see some research...

Re: Cotton wool v swabs

Rob Watkins — Wed, 14 Dec 2011 11:31:03 GMT

In the human side there is strong evidence to show that 2%CHG with 70%IPA prep has a superior profile.

Re: Cotton wool v swabs

Siobhan Steven — Wed, 14 Dec 2011 11:18:58 GMT

Using cotton wool for the initial prep, Chlorhexidine 0.05% Cetrimide 0.5%, for example, and 0.5% chlorhexidine in 70% alcohol and swabs for the final 70% Ethyl Alcohol is a good protocol. The contact time is the most important part. The swabs can be used in the last stage to remove any cotton wool fibers and by using cotton wool initially there will be less irritation. The aim is to minimise risk of breaking asepsis, which is why every stage of surgical prep, instrument and equipment processing and surgical suite setup should be impeccable, there are no excuses for putting patients at risk when we have the knowledge and the ability to not do so.

Re: Cotton wool v swabs

Rob Watkins — Fri, 11 Nov 2011 09:56:11 GMT

You might want to look at a recent news item from us...

www.vetnurse.co.uk/.../122605.aspx

Re: Cotton wool v swabs

Sal the 1st — Wed, 09 Nov 2011 19:10:41 GMT

if you want swabs that are not cotton look for the non woven ones.

Re: Cotton wool v swabs

Caro Laithwaite VN — Wed, 09 Nov 2011 17:51:57 GMT

Going to put cat amongst the pigeons but l do not think the sterilty in practice matters if you use man made or natural fibers. I think people would be shocked at the amount of non sterile items that are used from strike through on autoclaves items left to dry to washed drapes to reused suture needles to the suture material on a roll & many many other items & happen-stance that affect the operations & actually render them non sterile while we fool ourselves that they are sterile.

So would say whatever you like go for it.

Re: Cotton wool v swabs

julie williams — Wed, 09 Nov 2011 17:39:44 GMT

Thanks for that Im not a qualified nurse but have the ANA and have been nursing for 8 years

Did you qualify recently? maybe its all changed now

Thanks

Re: Cotton wool v swabs

F1chick — Wed, 09 Nov 2011 17:22:34 GMT

I was always taught not to use cotton wool because it leaves fibres behind, but most vets I work with still use cotton wool.