Bédard S, Desrochers A, Fecteau G, Higgins R
Clinique vétérinaire R-D-L Enr., 205, rue Lafontaine, Rivière-du-Loup, Québec, G5R 3A6.
Can Vet J. 2001 Mar;42(3):199-203.
This study was designed to evaluate 4 preoperative skin preparations, that is, more specifically, to compare the efficacy of chlorhexidine gluconate (CG) and povidone-iodine (PI), as well as 2 hair removal techniques (clipper alone or clipper followed by razor) for preoperative skin preparation in cattle. The 4 protocols resulted in a significant decrease in the number of bacterial colony-forming units (cfu). Group 4 (clipping + shaving + CG) had a significantly lower number of preoperative cfu per gel plate compared with groups 1 (clipping + PI) and 3 (clipping + shaving + PI). Skin reaction frequency was significantly higher in groups 3 and 4 (47.8% for both protocols) than in groups 1 and 2 (clipping + PI or CG) (8.7% for both). Wound infection frequency was 4.3% (4/92) and no significant difference was observed between the 4 treatment groups. The 4 protocols tested were equivalent as to efficacy and satisfactorily decreased skin microflora. Clipping alone was shown to be preferable to clipping plus shaving as a method of hair removal in cattle, with fewer skin reactions and no more wound infections.
本研究旨在评估4种术前皮肤准备方法,更具体地说,是比较葡萄糖酸氯己定(CG)和聚维酮碘(PI)的效果,以及2种脱毛技术(仅用剪毛器或先用剪毛器再用剃刀)在牛术前皮肤准备中的效果。这4种方案均使细菌菌落形成单位(cfu)数量显著减少。与第1组(剪毛+PI)和第3组(剪毛+剃毛+PI)相比,第4组(剪毛+剃毛+CG)每个凝胶平板的术前cfu数量显著更低。第3组和第4组的皮肤反应频率(两种方案均为47.8%)显著高于第1组和第2组(剪毛+PI或CG)(两种方案均为8.7%)。伤口感染频率为4.3%(4/92),4个治疗组之间未观察到显著差异。所测试的4种方案在效果上相当,且能令人满意地减少皮肤微生物群。在牛脱毛方法中,仅用剪毛器被证明比剪毛加剃毛更可取,皮肤反应更少,伤口感染也没有更多。