Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Search Search PubMed

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

4 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2026

Acceptability of alcohol-based hand rub during neonatal care in rural Ugandan households: a qualitative study nested within the BabyGel trial.

BACKGROUND: Poor access to water, sanitation and hygiene exacerbates the spread of infections among newborns. The BabyGel cluster randomised trial assessed the effectiveness of a community-level alcohol-based hand rub with a training component in reducing infection or death rates among newborns in Uganda. OBJECTIVE: Nested in the BabyGel trial, this study investigated the acceptability of the BabyGel intervention among mothers and household members in Eastern Uganda, using the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability. METHODS: In 2022, we conducted individual semistructured interviews with mothers, and group interviews with mothers and other household members, all recruited from intervention-arm clusters. Thematic analysis combined inductive and deductive coding, structured by the framework's seven constructs: affective attitude, burden, ethicality, intervention coherence, opportunity costs, perceived effectiveness and self-efficacy. RESULTS: Twenty mothers and 14 household members participated in 10 individual and 10 small group interviews. Participants found the intervention generally acceptable, appreciating its convenience and perceived protection against infection. Many described hand hygiene changes that persisted beyond the intervention period. However, concerns related to its harmful effects, spiritual beliefs and social tensions with visitors occasionally influenced its use. CONCLUSION: Alcohol-based hand rub combined with a training component was generally well accepted, driven by perceived health and practical benefits, although concerns related to safety, belief systems and social dynamics remained. Because data collection coincided with the COVID-19 pandemic, a period of heightened hygiene awareness, the acceptability observed could differ in nonpandemic periods. Culturally adapted education, community engagement and reinforcement of correct use may enhance acceptability and sustainability in similar settings.

Humans↗
PubMed2026

"Clinical efficacy and expression of antimicrobial resistance genes after using a novel herbal mouthwash compared to chlorhexidine: A Randomised controlled trial in generalised gingivitis patients".

OBJECTIVES: Chlorhexidine, the gold-standard mouthwash, has several disadvantages, like promotion of antimicrobial resistance. Herbal mouthwashes are emerging as alternatives to chlorhexidine. However, its impact on antimicrobial resistance remains unclear. The aim of the study was to compare the clinical efficacy and the expression of antimicrobial resistance genes of chlorhexidine with a novel herbal mouthwash. DESIGN: Sixty patients with generalised gingivitis were randomly assigned to two groups using block randomisation. After professional mechanical plaque removal patients were instructed to use either chlorhexidine or a novel herbal mouthwash (patented composition) for two weeks. Tetracycline resistance (tetM) and macrolide efflux (mefI) gene expression in subgingival plaque were analysed using real-time polymerase chain reaction. Intragroup comparisons were performed with a paired t-test and Wilcoxon signed-rank test for parametric and nonparametric data. Intergroup comparisons employed unpaired t-test, chi-square test, and Mann-Whitney test. RESULTS: A significant reduction in bleeding, plaque, pocket depth and and patient reported outcomes were noticed in both groups. But reduction in plaque was more significant in chlorhexidine group. tetM and mefI genes significantly upregulated in the chlorhexidine group, while it was downregulated with herbal mouthwash (fold change 1.79 ± 0.74 and 0.60 ± 0.43 for tetM, and 1.83 ± 0.87 and 0.51 ± 0.44 for mefI). However, patients' perception of taste, freshness, and overall satisfaction was better in the chlorhexidine group. CONCLUSIONS: The increased expression of antimicrobial resistance genes following chlorhexidine use warrants careful consideration. Herbal mouthwash is an effective, safer alternative with comparable clinical benefits and less impact on antimicrobial resistance.

Humans↗
PubMed2026

Effectiveness of chlorhexidine gluconate-impregnated dressings in preventing central line-associated bloodstream infection in a paediatric intensive care unit: A randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the effectiveness and dermatological safety of chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG)-impregnated dressings versus conventional transparent dressings in preventing central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) in paediatric patients admitted to a PICU. METHODS: A single-blind, randomised controlled trial with a 1:1 allocation ratio was conducted in a tertiary PICU. A total of 250 paediatric patients with a central venous catheter were included (125 per group). Patient characteristics, catheter-related variables, catheter dwell time and skin alterations were recorded. The primary outcome was CLABSI, defined according to CDC/NHSN criteria. Bivariate analyses and multivariable logistic regression were performed, including clinically relevant covariates related to catheter exposure, dressing type, and vaccination status. The trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT07175116). RESULTS: CLABSI incidence was significantly lower in the CHG group compared with the conventional dressing group (2.4% vs. 18.4%; p&#xa0;<&#xa0;0.001). In multivariable analysis, CHG-impregnated dressings were independently associated with reduced CLABSI risk (OR = 0.15; 95% CI: 0.04-0.58). Longer catheter dwell time (OR = 1.13 per day; 95% CI: 1.04-1.22) and absence of complete vaccination (OR = 8.68; 95% CI: 2.48-30.47) were also associated with increased infection risk. Incomplete vaccination showed a similar trend without reaching statistical significance (OR = 6.48; 95% CI: 0.95-44.20). Skin alterations were more frequent in the CHG group (16.8% vs. 11.2%), predominantly in younger infants. CONCLUSIONS: CHG-impregnated dressings were associated with a significant reduction in CLABSI incidence in critically ill paediatric patients, although their use was linked to a modest increase in mild skin reactions. IMPLICATIONS FOR CLINICAL PRACTICE: CHG-impregnated dressings may be considered as part of a multifaceted infection prevention strategy, alongside appropriate catheter management, minimisation of catheter manipulation and proactive skin monitoring, with cautious and individualised use in infants.

Humans↗
PubMed2026

Comparing the efficacy of chlorhexidine and povidone-iodine for surgical site disinfection: a systematic review and meta-analysis from randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Randomized controlled trials report conflicting evidence on the efficacy of different skin disinfectants for preventing surgical site infection (SSI). METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Embase for RCTs published up to February 2025 comparing preoperative skin disinfection with povidone-iodine (PVI) versus chlorhexidine (CH). Primary outcomes were overall, superficial, deep, and organ/space SSI rates. Secondary outcomes included hospital stay, readmission, and reoperation. RESULTS: CH was superior to PVI in preventing overall SSI (26 studies, n = 29,356; RR: 0.89; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.80 to 0.99). The overall SSI incidence rate in the CH group was 7.1% (1,045/14,677), compared with 7.8% (1,152/14,679) in the PVI group, equating to an 11% reduction in relative risk and a 0.7% reduction in absolute risk. The number needed to treat to prevent one SSI was 143. CH demonstrated superiority over PVI in preventing superficial SSI (13 studies, n = 16,867; RR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.64 to 0.92), but not for deep SSI (11 studies, n = 15,842; RR: 1.00; 95% CI: 0.77 to 1.29) or organ SSI (9 studies, n = 9,471; RR: 1.17; 95% CI: 0.89 to 1.53). No significant differences were found in hospital stay, readmission, or reoperation rates between the two groups. CONCLUSION: CH demonstrates statistical superiority over PVI in preventing overall and superficial SSI, though the absolute clinical benefit is modest. No significant differences were observed for deep or organ/space SSI, nor for secondary outcomes including hospital length of stay, readmission, or reoperation rates.

Humans↗