U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.

Chlorhexidine Gluconate Wipes for Infection Prevention in Acute and Critical Care: A Review of Clinical Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness [Internet]. Ottawa (ON): Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health; 2016 Apr 13.

Cover of Chlorhexidine Gluconate Wipes for Infection Prevention in Acute and Critical Care: A Review of Clinical Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness

Chlorhexidine Gluconate Wipes for Infection Prevention in Acute and Critical Care: A Review of Clinical Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness [Internet].

Show details

METHODS

Literature Search Methods

A limited literature search was conducted on key resources including PubMed, EBSCOhost CINAHL, The Cochrane Library, University of York Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD) databases, ECRI, Canadian and major international health technology agencies, as well as a focused Internet search. No filters were applied to limit the retrieval by study type. Where possible, retrieval was limited to the human population. The search was also limited to English language documents published between January 1, 2011 and March 15, 2016.

Rapid Response reports are organized so that the evidence for each research question is presented separately.

Selection Criteria and Methods

One reviewer screened citations and selected studies. In the first level of screening, titles and abstracts were reviewed and potentially relevant articles were retrieved and assessed for inclusion. The final selection of full-text articles was based on the inclusion criteria presented in Table 1.

Table 1. Selection Criteria.

Table 1

Selection Criteria.

Exclusion Criteria

Articles were excluded if they did not meet the selection criteria outlined in Table 1, they were duplicate publications, or were published prior to 2011. In addition, studies were excluded if the patient population consisted of surgical patients or pregnant women, or if the study comparators were alternative chlorhexidine preparations (e.g., sponge and solution).

Critical Appraisal of Individual Studies

The included systematic reviews were critically appraised using the AMSTAR instrument,5 while randomized and non-randomized studies were critically appraised using the Downs and Black checklist.6 Summary scores were not calculated for the included studies; rather, a review of the strengths and limitations of each included study were described narratively.

Copyright © 2016 Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health.

Copyright: This report contains CADTH copyright material and may contain material in which a third party owns copyright. This report may be used for the purposes of research or private study only. It may not be copied, posted on a web site, redistributed by email or stored on an electronic system without the prior written permission of CADTH or applicable copyright owner.

Links: This report may contain links to other information available on the websites of third parties on the Internet. CADTH does not have control over the content of such sites. Use of third party sites is governed by the owners’ own terms and conditions.

Except where otherwise noted, this work is distributed under the terms of a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International licence (CC BY-NC-ND), a copy of which is available at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

Bookshelf ID: NBK362250

Views

  • PubReader
  • Print View
  • Cite this Page
  • PDF version of this title (519K)

Other titles in this collection

Recent Activity

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

See more...