Objective: The aim of this study was to determine the effect of chlorhexidine gluconate on microbial growth in patients undergoing debridement for diabetic foot. Material and Methods: The study had a randomized, controlled experimental design. The study sample included a total of 60 patients. Of 60 patients, 30 were randomly assigned into the experimental group and 30 were randomly assigned into the control group. In the experimental group, the surgical site was washed with chlorhexidine gluconate 0.05% before and after debridement in addition to routine cleaning with povidone iodine before debridement. In the control group, all the steps of the procedure performed in the experimental group were followed except for using chlorhexidine gluconate 0.05%. Results: The experimental and control groups were found to be similar in terms of descriptive characteristics and diabetesrelated features. There was no difference in the presence of microorganisms before debridement between the experimental and control groups, but fewer species were isolated from the experimental group after debridement. The mean number of isolated species in the experimental group was 1.66±0.60 and 0.60±0.67 before and after debridement respectively. The mean number of isolated species in the control group was 1.06±0.58 and 1.10±0.75 before and after debridement respectively. Conclusion: It can be concluded that chlorhexidine gluconate and povidone iodine used before debridement are effective in reduction of the number of microbial species after debridement in patients with diabetic foot.
Keywords: Diabetic foot; preoperative skin preparation; infection; microorganism; nursing
Amaç: Araştırma, diyabetik ayak nedeniyle debridman uygulanan hastalarda klorheksidin solüsyonunun mikroorganizma üremesi üzerine etkisini belirlemek amacıyla yapılmış randomize kontrollü deneysel bir çalışmadır. Gereç ve Yöntemler: Çalışma müdahale grubunda 30, kontrol grubunda 30 olmak üzere toplam 60 hasta ile tamamlanmıştır. Müdahale grubundaki hastalara debridman öncesi rutin uygulanan povidon iyotlu cerrahi bölge temizliğine ek olarak %0,05'lik klorheksidin solüsyonuyla yıkama yapılmış, debridman sonrası tekrar klorheksidinle temizleme yapılarak pansuman kapatılmıştır. Kontrol grubunda deney grubundan farklı olarak %0,05'lik klorheksidin glukonatlı solüsyon kullanılmamış, diğer işlemler deney grubunda olduğu gibi uygulanmıştır. Bulgular: Müdahale ve kontrol grubundaki hastaların tanıtıcı özellikleri ve diyabete ilişkin özellikleri bakımından benzer olduğu görülmüştür. Müdahale ve kontrol grubunda debridman öncesi mikroorganizma varlığı açısından fark bulunmazken, debridman sonrası müdahale grubunda daha az sayıda mikroorganizma ürediği tespit edilmiştir. Müdahale grubunda debridman öncesi ve sonrası bakteri üreme ortalaması sırasıyla 1,66±0,60 ve 0,60±0,67 olarak saptanmıştır. Kontrol grubunda debridman öncesi ve sonrası bakteri üreme ortalaması ise sırasıyla 1,06±0,58 ve 1,10±0,75 olarak tespit edilmiştir. Sonuç: Araştırma bulgularımıza dayanarak, diyabetik ayağı olan bireylerde debridman öncesi uygulanan klorheksidin solüsyonunun debridman sonrası mikroorganizma sayısını azaltmada etkili olduğu söylenebilir.
Anahtar Kelimeler: Diyabetik ayak; preoperatif cilt hazırlığı; enfeksiyon; mikroorganizma; hemşirelik
- Edmonds M, Manu C, Vas P. The current burden of diabetic foot disease. J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2021;17:88-93. [Crossref] [PubMed] [PMC]
- Bekele F, Chelkeba L, Fekadu G, Bekele K. Risk factors and outcomes of diabetic foot ulcer among diabetes mellitus patients admitted to Nekemte referral hospital, western Ethiopia: Prospective observational study. Ann Med Surg (Lond). 2020;51:17-23. [Crossref] [PubMed] [PMC]
- Armstrong DG, Swerdlow MA, Armstrong AA, Conte MS, Padula WV, Bus SA. Five year mortality and direct costs of care for people with diabetic foot complications are comparable to cancer. J Foot Ankle Res. 2020;13(1):16. [Crossref] [PubMed] [PMC]
- Akturk A, van Netten JJ, Scheer R, Vermeer M, van Baal JG. Ulcer-free survival days and ulcer healing in patients with diabetic foot ulcers: A prospective cohort study. Int Wound J. 2019;16(6):1365-72. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Lebrun E, Tomic-Canic M, Kirsner RS. The role of surgical debridement in healing of diabetic foot ulcers. Wound Repair Regen. 2010;18(5):433-8. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Steed DL, Attinger C, Colaizzi T, Crossland M, Franz M, Harkless L, et al. Guidelines for the treatment of diabetic ulcers. Wound Repair and Regeneration. 2006;14(6):680-92. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Shadid MB, Speth MJGM, Voorn GP, Wolterbeek N. Chlorhexidine 0.5%/70% Alcohol and Iodine 1%/70% Alcohol Both Reduce Bacterial Load in Clean Foot Surgery: A Randomized, Controlled Trial. J Foot Ankle Surg. 2019;58(2):278-281. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Weinstein RA, Milstone AM, Passaretti CL, Trish M. Chlorhexidine: Expanding the armamentarium for infection control and prevention, Clinical Infectious Diseases. 2008;46(2):274-81. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Adıgüzel Ö. Klorheksidin [Chlorhexidine]. J Endod-Special Topics. 2015;1(2):15-20. [Link]
- Chaiyakunapruk N, Veenstra DL, Lipsky BA, Saint S. Chlorhexidine compared with povidone-iodine solution for vascular catheter-site care: a meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med. 2002;136(11):792-801. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Darouiche RO, Wall MJ Jr, Itani KM, Otterson MF, Webb AL, Carrick MM, et al. Chlorhexidine-alcohol versus povidone-ıodine for surgical-site antisepsis. N Engl J Med. 2010;362(1):18-26. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Eryılmaz M, Akın A, Arıkan Akan O. Bazı dezenfektanların nozokomiyal enfeksiyon etkeni staphylococcus aureus ve enterococcus spp. izolatları üzerine olan etkilerinin araştırılması [Investigation of the efficacy of some disinfectants against nosocomial Staphylococcus aureus and Enterococcus spp. isolates]. Mikrobiyol Bul. 2011;45(3):454-60. Turkish. [PubMed]
- Kaleli İ, Demir M. Klorheksidin glukonat ve povidon-iyotun çeşitli bakteriler üzerine etkinliğinin araştırılması [The effect of chlorhexidine gluconate and povidone-iodine on various bacteria]. Ankem Derg. 2000;14(1):92-7. [Link]
- Wang JT, Sheng WH, Wang JL, Chen D, Chen ML, Chen YC, et al. Longitudinal analysis of chlorhexidine susceptibilities of nosocomial methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus isolates at a teaching hospital in Taiwan. Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. 2008;62(3):514-7. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Alexiadou K, Doupis J. Management of diabetic foot ulcers. Diabetes Ther. 2012;3(1):4. [Crossref] [PubMed] [PMC]
- Farrelly R. NHS Nurses' fight against infection. British Journal of Nursing. 2014;23:121. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Wagner FW Jr. The dysvascular foot: a system for diagnosis and treatment. Foot Ankle. 1981;2(2):64-122. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Nageen A. The most prevalent organism in diabetic foot ulcers and its drug sensitivity and resistance to different standard antibiotics. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak. 2016;26(4):293-6. [PubMed]
- Citron DM, Goldstein EJ, Merriam CV, Lipsky BA, Abramson MA. Bacteriology of moderate-to-severe diabetic foot infections and in vitro activity of antimicrobial agents. J Clin Microbiol. 2007;45(9):2819-28. [Crossref] [PubMed] [PMC]
- Şerefhanoğlu K, Turan H, Ergin T, Arslan H. Diyabetik ayak infeksiyonlarının aerobik bakteriyolojik analizi [Aerobic bacteriological analysis of diabetic foot infections]. Ankem Derg. 2006;20(2):85-8. [Link]
- Shankar EM, Mohan V, Premalatha G, Srinivasan RS, Usha AR. Bacterial etiology of diabetic foot infections in South India. Eur J Intern Med. 2005;16(8):567-70. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Mimoz O, Karim A, Mercat A, Cosseron M, Falissard B, Parker F, et al. Chlorhexidine compared with povidone-iodine as skin preparation before blood culture. A randomized, controlled trial. Ann Intern Med. 1999;131(11):834-7. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Goztok M, Terzi MC, Egeli T, Arslan NC, Canda AE. Does Wound Irrigation with Clorhexidine Gluconate Reduce the Surgical Site Infection Rate in Closure of Temporary Loop Ileostomy? A Prospective Clinical Study. Surg Infect (Larchmt). 2018;19(6):634-9. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Çobanoğlu A, Şendir M. Epizyotomi yarasının bakımında klorheksidin glukonat solüsyonunun iyileşme sürecine etkisi [Effect of chlorhexidine gluconate solution on healing process in care of episiotomy wound]. Cukurova Medical Journal. 2020;45(3):891-8. [Crossref]
- McLure AR, Gordon J. In-vitro evaluation of povidone-iodine and chlorhexidine against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. J Hosp Infect. 1992;21(4):291-9. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Michel D, Zäch GA. Antiseptic efficacy of disinfecting solutions in suspension test in vitro against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Escherichia coli in pressure sore wounds after spinal cord injury. Dermatology. 1997;195 Suppl 2:36-41. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Türkyılmaz A. Sezaryen ameliyatlarında cilt hazırlığında kullanılan %4 klorheksidin glukonat ile %10 povidon iyot etkinliğinin karşılaştırılması [Yüksek lisans tezi]. İstanbul: Okan Üniversitesi; 2018. (Erişim tarihi: 13 Kasım 2023) Erişim linki: [Link]
.: Process List