Diluted povidone-iodine versus saline for dressing metal-skin interfaces in external fixation.

21Citations
Citations of this article
67Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare infection rates associated with 2 dressing solutions for metal-skin interfaces. METHODS: 60 patients who underwent distraction osteogenesis with external fixators were equally randomised into 2 dressing solution groups (diluted povidone-iodine vs. saline). Fixations were attained using either rigid stainless steel 5-mm diameter half pins or smooth stainless steel 1.8-mm diameter wires. Half-pin fixation had one metal-skin interface, whereas wire fixation had 2 interfaces. Patients were followed up every 2 weeks for 6 months. RESULTS: Of all 788 metal-skin interfaces, 143 (18%) were infected: 72 (19%) of 371 in the diluted povidone-iodine group and 71 (17%) of 417 in the saline group. Dressing solution and patient age did not significantly affect infection rates. Half-pin fixation was more likely to become infected than wire fixation (25% vs 15%). CONCLUSION: Saline is as effective as diluted povidone-iodine as a dressing solution for metal-skin interfaces of external fixators. Saline is recommended in view of its easy availability and lower costs.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Chan, C. K., Saw, A., Kwan, M. K., & Karina, R. (2009). Diluted povidone-iodine versus saline for dressing metal-skin interfaces in external fixation. Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery (Hong Kong), 17(1), 19–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/230949900901700105

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free