Surgical Site Infections


The article seeks to establish whether the use of Chlorhexidine Gluconate Preoperative Cleansing significantly helps minimize the risks or infections associated with surgical sites. Evidently, these surgical sites contribute to the death of patients to a great extent. As a result, this has prompted the urgency to establish a risk reduction or intervention mechanism with the use of chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) as a skin cleansing agent. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention National Healthcare Safety Network, surgical site infections are third-placed in healthcare linked diseases (Edmiston Jr, Okoli, Graham, Sinski, & Seabrook, 2010). The use of antimicrobial prophylaxis, perioperative skin antisepsis, and meticulous surgical mechanism has proven ineffective. Thus, there is a need to improve patient outcomes through the use of a cleaning gel before one is admitted to a health facility.


The first study was conducted on 1,100 collected from clinical isolates, both as gram-positive and negative characters. All of them showed low or no resistance to CGH. In a separate experiment in Taiwan, 240 isolates recovered in 15 years (Edmiston Jr, Okoli, Graham, Sinski, & Seabrook, 2010).. According to the Department of Surgery at the Medical College of Wisconsin in Milwaukee, the staphylococcal isolates depicted a low resistance of microbial infections to CGH.

Results and Findings

The study demonstrates the essentiality of considering patient safety at all times. It is guided by the ability to monitor the risks associated with the use of CGH or skin antiseptic. Incidences of skin hypersensitivity from the use of CGH are negligible. However, there are cases of skin irritations reported from the two study experiments. That is, from the initial study, 4.2% and 3.3% for the Taiwan experiment postulates that the isolates showed skin irritations.

As a consequence, this study is essential in the health sector. Nurses are provided with crucial information about infection prevention. The use of CGH would provide effectiveness when used as a preoperative skin antiseptic before hospital admission. It demonstrates the various steps to take before patient admission and the application of CGH. Thus, this study is essential for nursing practice.



Limitations/ Weaknesses      

From the study, it is evident that the application of CGH is prescribed in a standardized amount. That is, 4% as a preadmission showering and 2% of the amount on polyester cloth (Edmiston Jr, Okoli, Graham, Sinski, & Seabrook, 2010).. High concentrations of the amount on the skin is not a prerequisite for infection reduction. Additionally, one is limited to at least two cleansings to guarantee hospital admission. Also, patients are instructed to stop the use of CGH if it causes burning or irritation sensation. Water is preferred in this case. Besides, one is not allowed to use a body lotion or a deodorant after the application of the antiseptic. Lastly, the surrogate studies do not address the importance of infection prevention risk minimization of CGH as a preadmission cleansing agent. The author does not highlight the next steps of the research topic to expound on this issue.


            It is imperative to minimize preadmission infections to enhance patient outcomes. An effective prevention mechanism is crucial to reduce morbidities and mortality rates among patients admitted in hospitals. Non-irritating showering preadmission agents such as CGH are suitable to reduce these infections. To enhance professionalism and expertise in my nursing field, this article provides crucial information about patient handling. The use of CGH has proven to minimize preadmission infections to a significant measure. I will apply this critical information in my work.


Edmiston Jr, C. E., Okoli, O., Graham, M. B., Sinski, S., & Seabrook, G. R. (2010). Evidence for using chlorhexidine gluconate preoperative cleansing to reduce the risk of surgical site infection. AORN Journal92(5), 509-518.