Cleaning solutions and bacterial colonization in promoting healing and early separation of the umbilical cord in healthy newborns

Water for wound cleansing

BACKGROUND

Although various solutions have been recommended for cleansing wounds, normal saline is favoured as it is an isotonic solution and is not thought to interfere with the normal healing process. Tap water is commonly used in community settings for cleansing wounds because it is easily accessible, efficient and cost-effective; however, there is an unresolved debate about its use.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of water for wound cleansing.

SEARCH METHODS

For this fifth update, in May 2021 we searched the Cochrane Wounds Specialised Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase and EBSCO CINAHL Plus. We also searched clinical trials registries for ongoing and unpublished studies, and scanned reference lists of relevant included studies as well as reviews, meta-analyses and health technology reports to identify additional studies. There were no restrictions with respect to language, date of publication or study setting.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed wound cleansing using different types of water (e.g. tap water, distilled, boiled) compared with no cleansing or with other solutions (e.g. normal saline). For this update, we excluded quasi-RCTs, thereby removing some studies which had been included in the previous version of the review.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently carried out trial selection, data extraction and GRADE assessment of the certainty of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 13 trials in this update including a total of 2504 participants ranging in age from two to 95 years. Participants in the trials experienced open fractures, surgical wounds, traumatic wounds, anal fissures and chronic wounds. The trials were conducted in six different countries with the majority conducted in India and the USA. Three trials involving 148 participants compared cleansing with tap water with no cleansing. Eight trials involving 2204 participants assessed cleansing with tap water compared with cleansing with normal saline. Two trials involving 152 participants assessed cleansing with distilled water compared with cleansing with normal saline.  One trial involving 51 participants also assessed cleansing with cooled boiled water compared with cleansing with normal saline, and cleansing with distilled water compared with cleansing with cooled boiled water. Wound infection: no trials reported on wound infection for the comparison cleansing with tap water versus no cleansing. For all wounds, eight trials found the effect of cleansing with tap water compared with normal saline is uncertain (risk ratio (RR) 0.84, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.59 to 1.19); very low-certainty evidence. Two trials comparing the use of distilled water with normal saline for cleansing open fractures found that the effect on the number of fractures that were infected is uncertain (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.09); very low-certainty evidence. One trial compared the use of cooled boiled water with normal saline for cleansing open fractures and found that the effect on the number of fractures infected is uncertain (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.87); very low-certainty evidence. This trial also compared the use of distilled water with cooled boiled water and found that the effect on the number of fractures infected is uncertain (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.47); very low-certainty evidence. Wound healing: results from three trials comparing the use of tap water with no wound cleansing demonstrated there may be little or no difference in the number of wounds that did not heal between the groups (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.14); low-certainty evidence. The effect of tap water compared with normal saline is uncertain; two trials were pooled (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.30 to 1.07) but the certainty of the evidence is very low. Results from one study comparing the use of distilled water with normal saline for cleansing open fractures found that there may be little or no difference in the number of fractures that healed (RR could not be estimated, all wounds healed); the certainty of the evidence is low. Reduction in wound size: the effect of cleansing with tap water compared with normal saline on wound size reduction is uncertain (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.68); the certainty of the evidence is very low. Rate of wound healing: the effect of cleansing with tap water compared with normal saline on wound healing rate is uncertain (mean difference (MD) -3.06, 95% CI -6.70 to 0.58); the certainty of the evidence is very low.

COSTS

two trials reported cost analyses but the cost-effectiveness of tap water compared with the use of normal saline is uncertain; the certainty of the evidence is very low. Pain: results from one study comparing the use of tap water with no cleansing for acute and chronic wounds showed that there may be little or no difference in pain scores. The certainty of the evidence is low. Patient satisfaction: results from one study comparing the use of tap water with no cleansing for acute and chronic wounds showed that there may be little or no difference in patient satisfaction. The certainty of evidence is low. The effect of cleansing with tap water compared with normal saline is uncertain as the certainty of the evidence is very low.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

All the evidence identified in the review was low or very low certainty. Cleansing with tap water may make little or no difference to wound healing compared with no cleansing; there are no data relating to the impact on wound infection. The effects of cleansing with tap water, cooled boiled water or distilled water compared with cleansing with saline are uncertain, as is the effect of distilled water compared with cooled boiled water. Data for other outcomes are limited across all the comparisons considered and are either uncertain or suggest that there may be little or no difference in the outcome.

Umbilical cord antiseptics for preventing sepsis and death among newborns

BACKGROUND

The umbilical cord is a structure made of blood vessels and connective tissue that connects the baby and placenta in utero. The umbilical cord is cut after birth, which separates the mother and her baby both physically and symbolically. Omphalitis is defined as infection of the umbilical cord stump. Tracking of bacteria along the umbilical vessels may lead to septicaemia that can result in neonatal morbidity and mortality, especially in developing countries.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effect of application of antimicrobials on newborn's umbilical cord versus routine care for prevention of morbidity and mortality in hospital and community settings.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (1 October 2012). In addition, we also searched LILACS (1982 to 11 October 2012) and HERDIN NeON (October 2012)

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized, cluster-randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials of topical cord care compared with no topical care, and comparisons between different forms of care.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion, trial quality and subsequently extracted data. Data were checked for accuracy.

MAIN RESULTS

The search identified 77 trials. We included 34 trials in the review involving 69,338 babies, five studies are awaiting classification and there are two ongoing community trials. Included studies were conducted in both developed and developing countries. Among the 34 included trials, three were large, cluster-randomized trials conducted in community settings in developing countries and 31 studies were conducted in hospital settings mostly in developed countries. Data for community and hospital studies were analyzed separately. The three trials conducted in community settings contributed 78% of the total number of children included in this review. Of the trials conducted in hospital settings, the majority had small sample sizes. There were 22 different interventions studied across the included trials and the most commonly studied antiseptics were 70% alcohol, triple dye and chlorhexidine.Only one antiseptic, chlorhexidine was studied in community settings for umbilical cord care. Three community trials reported data on all-cause mortality that comprised 1325 deaths in 54,624 participants and combined results showed a reduction of 23% (average risk ratio (RR) 0.77, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.63 to 0.94, random-effects, T² = 0.02, I² = 50%) in the chlorhexidine group compared with control. The reduction in omphalitis ranged from 27% to 56% depending on the severity of infection. Cord separation time was increased by 1.7 days in the chlorhexidine group compared with dry cord care (mean difference (MD) 1.75 days, 95% CI 0.44 to 3.05, random-effects, T² = 0.88, I² = 100%). Washing of umbilical cord with soap and water was not advantageous compared with dry cord care in community settings.Among studies conducted in hospital settings, no study reported data for mortality or tetanus. No antiseptic was advantageous to reduce the incidence of omphalitis compared with dry cord care in hospital settings. Topical triple dye application reduced bacterial colonization with Staphylococcus aureus compared with dry cord care (average RR 0.15, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.22, four studies, n = 1319, random-effects, T² = 0.04, I² = 24%) or alcohol application (average RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.80, two studies, n = 487, random-effects, T² = 0.00, I² = 0%). There was no advantage of application of alcohol and triple dye for reduction of colonization with streptococcus. Topical alcohol application was advantageous in reduction of colonization with Enterococcus coli compared with dry cord care (average RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.92, two studies, n = 432, random-effects, T² = 0.00, I² = 0%) and in a separate analysis, triple dye increased the risk of colonization compared with alcohol (RR 3.44, 95% CI 2.10 to 5.64, one study, n = 373). Cord separation time was significantly increased with topical application of alcohol (MD 1.76 days, 95% CI 0.03 to 3.48, nine studies, n = 2921, random-effects, T² = 6.54, I² = 97%) and triple dye (MD 4.10 days, 95% CI 3.07 to 5.13, one study, n = 372) compared with dry cord care in hospital settings. The number of studies was insufficient to make any inference about the efficacy of other antiseptics.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is significant evidence to suggest that topical application of chlorhexidine to umbilical cord reduces neonatal mortality and omphalitis in community and primary care settings in developing countries. It may increase cord separation time however, there is no evidence that it increases risk of subsequent morbidity or infection.There is insufficient evidence to support the application of an antiseptic to umbilical cord in hospital settings compared with dry cord care in developed countries.

Chlorhexidine cleansing of the umbilical cord and separation time: a cluster-randomized trial

OBJECTIVE

Cord cleansing with chlorhexidine reduces neonatal mortality. We aimed to quantify the impact of this intervention on cord separation time and the implications of such an increase on maternal and other caretaker's acceptance of chlorhexidine in future scaled up programs.

METHODS

Between June 2007 and September 2009, 29,760 newborns were randomly assigned within communities in Bangladesh to receive 1 of 3 cord regimens: dry and clean cord care (comparison), single-cleansing, or multiple-cleansing with 4.0% chlorhexidine. Workers recorded separation status during home visits. Mothers of 380 infants in randomly selected clusters reported age at separation and satisfaction with cord regimen.

RESULTS

Compared with dry and clean care (mean 4.78 days), separation time was longer in the single (mean 6.90 days, difference = 2.10; 95% confidence interval: 1.85-2.35) and multiple (mean 7.49 days, difference = 2.69; 95% confidence interval: 2.44-2.95) cleansing groups. Increased separation time was not associated with omphalitis. Mothers in these groups more frequently reported "longer than usual" separation times and dissatisfaction with the separation time (11.1% and 17.6%, respectively) versus the comparison group (2.5%). Overall satisfaction with the received cord care regimen was high (96.2%).

CONCLUSIONS

Topical chlorhexidine increased cord separation time by ∼50%. Caretakers are likely to detect this increase and might express dissatisfaction but still accept the intervention overall. When scaling up chlorhexidine cord cleansing, inclusion of appropriate messaging on expectation and nonrisks of increased cord separation time, in addition to the benefits of reduced infection and improved survival, might improve compliance.

Water for wound cleansing

BACKGROUND

Although various solutions have been recommended for cleansing wounds, normal saline is favoured as it is an isotonic solution and does not interfere with the normal healing process. Tap water is commonly used in the community for cleansing wounds because it is easily accessible, efficient and cost effective; however, there is an unresolved debate about its use.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review was to assess the effects of water compared with other solutions for wound cleansing.

SEARCH METHODS

For this fourth update we searched the Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register (searched 9 November 2011); The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 4); Ovid MEDLINE (2010 to October Week 4 2011); Ovid MEDLINE (In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, November 8, 2011); Ovid EMBASE (2010 to 2011 Week 44); and EBSCO CINAHL (2010 to 4 November 2011).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised and quasi randomised controlled trials that compared the use of water with other solutions for wound cleansing were eligible for inclusion. Additional criteria were outcomes that included objective or subjective measures of wound infection or healing.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently carried out trial selection, data extraction and quality assessment. We settled differences in opinion by discussion. We pooled some data using a random-effects model.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 11 trials in this review. We identified seven trials that compared rates of infection and healing in wounds cleansed with water and normal saline; three trials compared cleansing with no cleansing and one trial compared procaine spirit with water. There were no standard criteria for assessing wound infection across the trials, which limited the ability to pool the data. The major comparisons were water with normal saline, and tap water with no cleansing. For chronic wounds, the relative risk of developing an infection when cleansed with tap water compared with normal saline was 0.16, (95% CI 0.01 to 2.96). Tap water was more effective than saline in reducing the infection rate in adults with acute wounds (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.99). The use of tap water to cleanse acute wounds in children was not associated with a statistically significant difference in infection when compared to saline (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.43 to 2.64). We identified no statistically significant differences in infection rates when wounds were cleansed with tap water or not cleansed at all (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.07 to 16.50). Likewise, there was no difference in the infection rate in episiotomy wounds cleansed with water or procaine spirit. The use of isotonic saline, distilled water and boiled water for cleansing open fractures also did not demonstrate a statistically significant difference in the number of fractures that were infected.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is no evidence that using tap water to cleanse acute wounds in adults increases infection and some evidence that it reduces it. However there is not strong evidence that cleansing wounds per se increases healing or reduces infection. In the absence of potable tap water, boiled and cooled water as well as distilled water can be used as wound cleansing agents.

Newborn umbilical cord and skin care in Sylhet District, Bangladesh: implications for the promotion of umbilical cord cleansing with topical chlorhexidine

Newborn cord care practices may directly contribute to infections, which account for a large proportion of the four million annual global neonatal deaths. This formative research study assessed current umbilical and skin care knowledge and practices for neonates in Sylhet District, Bangladesh, in preparation for a cluster-randomized trial of the impact of topical chlorhexidine cord cleansing on neonatal mortality and omphalitis. Unstructured interviews (n=60), structured observations (n=20), rating and ranking exercises (n=40) and household surveys (n=400) were conducted to elicit specific behaviors regarding newborn cord and skin care practices. These included hand-washing, skin and cord care at the time of birth, persons engaged in cord care, cord cutting practices, topical applications to the cord at the time of birth, wrapping/dressing of the cord stump and use of skin-to-skin care. Overall 90% of deliveries occurred at home. The umbilical cord was almost always (98%) cut after delivery of the placenta, and cut by mothers in more than half the cases (57%). Substances were commonly (52%) applied to the stump after cord cutting; turmeric was the most common application (83%). Umbilical stump care revolved around bathing, skin massage with mustard oil and heat massage on the umbilical stump. Overall 40% of newborns were bathed on the day of birth. Mothers were the principal provider for skin and cord care during the neonatal period and 9% of them reported umbilical infections in their infants. Unhygienic cord care practices are prevalent in the study area. Efforts to promote hand-washing, cord cutting with clean instruments and avoiding unclean home applications to the cord may reduce exposure and improve neonatal outcomes. Such efforts should broadly target a range of caregivers, including mothers and other female household members.

Water for wound cleansing

BACKGROUND

Various solutions have been recommended for cleansing wounds, however normal saline is favoured as it is an isotonic solution and does not interfere with the normal healing process. Tap water is commonly used in the community for cleansing wounds because it is easily accessible, efficient and cost effective, however, there is an unresolved debate about its use.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review was to assess the effects of water compared with other solutions for wound cleansing.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials were identified by electronic searches of Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register (June 2007), MEDLINE (1996-2007), EMBASE (1980-2007), CINAHL (1982-2007) and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (Issue 3; 2007). Primary authors, company representatives and content experts were contacted to identify eligible studies. Reference lists from included trials were also searched.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised and quasi randomised controlled trials that compared the use of water with other solutions for wound cleansing were eligible for inclusion. Additional criteria were outcomes that included objective or subjective measures of wound infection or healing.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Trial selection, data extraction and quality assessment were carried out independently by two authors and checked by a third author. Differences in opinion were settled by discussion. Some data were pooled using a random effects model.

MAIN RESULTS

Eleven trials were included in this review. Seven trials were identified that compared rates of infection and healing in wounds cleansed with water and normal saline, three trials compared cleansing with no cleansing and one trial compared procaine spirit with water. There were no standard criteria for assessing wound infection across the trials which limited the ability to pool the data. The major comparisons were water with normal saline, and tap water with no cleansing. For chronic wounds, the relative risk of developing an infection when cleansed with tap water compared with normal saline was 0.16, (95% CI 0.01 to 2.96). Tap water was more effective than saline in reducing the infection rate in adults with acute wounds (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.99). The use of tap water to cleanse acute wounds in children was not associated with a statistically significant difference in infection when compared to saline (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.43 to 2.64). No statistically significant differences in infection rates were seen when wounds were cleansed with tap water or not cleansed at all (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.07 to 16.50). Likewise, there was no difference in the infection rate in episiotomy wounds cleansed with water or procaine spirit. The use of isotonic saline, distilled water and boiled water for cleansing open fractures also did not demonstrate a statistically significant difference in the number of fractures that were infected.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is no evidence that using tap water to cleanse acute wounds in adults increases infection and some evidence that it reduces it. However there is not strong evidence that cleansing wounds per se increases healing or reduces infection. In the absence of potable tap water, boiled and cooled water as well as distilled water can be used as wound cleansing agents.

Impact of umbilical cord cleansing with 4.0% chlorhexidine on time to cord separation among newborns in southern Nepal: a cluster-randomized, community-based trial

OBJECTIVE

Within a community-based, cluster-randomized study of the effects of 4.0% chlorhexidine on omphalitis and mortality risk, we aimed to describe the distribution of times to separation and the impact of topical chlorhexidine treatment on cord-separation times.

METHODS

Between November 2002 and March 2005, 15123 infants were assigned randomly within communities in southern Nepal to receive 1 of the following 3 cord-care regimens: cleansing with 4.0% chlorhexidine, cleansing with soap and water, or dry cord care. In intervention clusters, field workers cleansed the cord in the home on days 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, and 10 after birth. Newborns were monitored throughout the newborn period for signs of omphalitis, and the time to cord separation was noted. Separation times were compared across treatment groups. Cord infection risk and a range of infant and household characteristics were assessed for their relationships to separation time.

RESULTS

The mean separation time was shorter in dry cord care (4.24 days) and soap/water (4.25 days) clusters than in chlorhexidine clusters (5.32 days; mean difference: 1.08 days). Cords of infants who received chlorhexidine were 3.6 times more likely to separate after 7 days. Separation time was not associated with omphalitis. Home-delivered topical antiseptics, facility-based birth, and birth attendant hand-washing were associated with greater likelihoods of cord separation after 7 days of age.

CONCLUSIONS

In this setting, the umbilical cord separated more rapidly than observed in hospital-based studies, and the impact of chlorhexidine cleansing on separation times was negligible. Increased cord-separation time attributable to topical chlorhexidine treatment should not be considered a factor in decision-making in settings where the baseline risk of omphalitis is high and chlorhexidine might reduce infection and mortality risks significantly.

Umbilical cord care: a pilot study comparing topical human milk, povidone-iodine, and dry care

OBJECTIVE

To compare the incidence of omphalitis among three groups, each using a different type of newborn cord care: povidone-iodine, dry care, and topical human milk.

DESIGN

Case control.

SETTING

A large urban university hospital in Turkey and participant homes after discharge.

PARTICIPANTS

150 healthy, full-term newborns and their mothers.

INTERVENTIONS

Umbilical cord care consisted of one of three methods: topical application of povidone-iodine twice daily, topical application of mother's milk twice daily, or dry care (keeping the cord dry and clean).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Outcome was measured in terms of the presence or absence of omphalitis and the number of days elapsed before cord separation. An ongoing questionnaire was administered by telephone every other day after the participants left the hospital. In addition to demographic information, the cord separation day and any signs of omphalitis were recorded in the questionnaire.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences between the three groups in terms of omphalitis occurrence. Two cases of omphalitis were observed (one in the human milk group, one in the povidone-iodine group). Interestingly, babies in the dry care or topical human milk group had shorter cord separation times than those in the povidone-iodine group.

CONCLUSION

The cultural practice of applying human milk to the umbilical cord stump appears to have no adverse effects and is associated with shorter cord separation times than are seen with the use of antiseptics.

Community-based interventions for improving perinatal and neonatal health outcomes in developing countries: a review of the evidence

BACKGROUND

Infant and under-5 childhood mortality rates in developing countries have declined significantly in the past 2 to 3 decades. However, 2 critical indicators, maternal and newborn mortality, have hardly changed. World leaders at the United Nations Millennium Summit in September 2000 agreed on a critical goal to reduce deaths of children <5 years by two thirds, but this may be unattainable without halving newborn deaths, which now comprise 40% of all under-5 deaths. Greater emphasis on wide-scale implementation of proven, cost-effective measures is required to save women's and newborns' lives. Approximately 99% of neonatal deaths take place in developing countries, mostly in homes and communities. A comprehensive review of the evidence base for impact of interventions on neonatal health and survival in developing-country communities has not been reported.

OBJECTIVE

This review of community-based antenatal, intrapartum, and postnatal intervention trials in developing countries aimed to identify (1) key behaviors and interventions for which the weight of evidence is sufficient to recommend their inclusion in community-based neonatal care programs and (2) key gaps in knowledge and priority areas for future research and program learning.

METHODS

Available published and unpublished data on the impact of community-based strategies and interventions on perinatal and neonatal health status outcomes were reviewed. Evidence was summarized systematically and categorized into 4 levels of evidence based on study size, location, design, and reported impact, particularly on perinatal or neonatal mortality. The evidence was placed in the context of biological plausibility of the intervention; evidence from relevant developed-country studies; health care program experience in implementation; and recommendations from the World Health Organization and other leading agencies.

RESULTS

A paucity of community-based data was found from developing-country studies on health status impact for many interventions currently being considered for inclusion in neonatal health programs. However, review of the evidence and consideration of the broader context of knowledge, experience, and recommendations regarding these interventions enabled us to categorize them according to the strength of the evidence base and confidence regarding their inclusion now in programs. This article identifies a package of priority interventions to include in programs and formulates research priorities for advancing the state of the art in neonatal health care.

CONCLUSIONS

This review emphasizes some new findings while recommending an integrated approach to safe motherhood and newborn health. The results of this study provide a foundation for policies and programs related to maternal and newborn health and emphasizes the importance of health systems research and evaluation of interventions. The review offers compelling support for using research to identify the most effective measures to save newborn lives. It also may facilitate dialogue with policy makers about the importance of investing in neonatal health.

Tub Bathing Versus Traditional Sponge Bathing for the Newborn

OBJECTIVE

To compare selected effects of tub bathing versus traditional sponge bathing in healthy, term newborns and their mothers' ratings of pleasure and confidence with the bath.

DESIGN

Randomized controlled study.

SETTING

The maternity unit of an eastern Canadian hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

One hundred two mother-baby pairs were randomly assigned to an experimental tub bath or a sponge bath control group.

INTERVENTIONS

Fifty-one newborns were tub bathed and 51 sponge bathed according to the study protocols for their initial and one additional bath.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

(a) Newborn temperature stability was assessed by recording axillary temperatures pre- and postbath, (b) umbilical cord healing was identified by daily observations and infection control surveillance, (c) infant contentment was quantified by applying the Brazelton Neonatal Behavioral Assessment Scale, and (d) maternal pleasure with the bath and confidence with bathing at discharge were self-rated on a 5-point scale.

RESULTS

Tub-bathed babies experienced significantly less temperature loss (t = 4.79, p = .00) and were significantly more content (t = -6.48, p = .00) than were those who were sponge bathed. No differences in cord healing scores were found. Mothers of tub bathed babies rated their pleasure with the bath significantly higher than did mothers of sponge bathed babies (t = 4.15, p = .00). No differences in maternal confidence were noted.

CONCLUSIONS

Tub bathing is a safe and pleasurable alternative to sponge bathing in healthy, term newborns.

Anomalies, abnormalities, and care of the umbilicus

This article discusses various anomalies and abnormalities of the umbilical cord and issues related to cord care. The issue of screening newborns with an isolated single umbilical artery for renal abnormalities is addressed. The clinical presentation of infants with omphalomesenteric and urachal duct remants along with the more common umbilical granuloma is reviewed. All three of these abnormalities can present with a wet or draining cord. The need for umbilical cord treatment with antimicrobial/antiseptic agents versus dry cord care is discussed, as are serious infections that involve the cord.

Does umbilical cord care in preterm infants influence cord bacterial colonization or detachment?

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of the present study was to compare alcohol versus natural drying for umbilical cord care in preterm infants and to examine its effects on bacterial colonization and cord detachment.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

Eligible infants <34 weeks gestation admitted to the NICU were randomized to receive either umbilical cleansing with 70% isopropyl alcohol at each diaper change or natural drying. Umbilical stump cultures were performed at 12 to 24 hours, 72 hours, 7 days, and 14 days of age.

RESULTS

A total of 109 infants were enrolled; 102 completed the study. Analyses revealed that the median cord detachment time was significantly shorter in the natural drying group compared to the alcohol group (13.0 versus 16.0 days; p=0.003). There were no cases of local umbilical infection in either group.

CONCLUSION

Based on the present study, it appears that natural drying is a safe and effective means of umbilical cord care in preterm infants.

Topical umbilical cord care at birth

BACKGROUND

Umbilical cord infection caused many neonatal deaths before aseptic techniques were used.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of topical cord care in preventing cord infection, illness and death.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group trials register (September 2003) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library, Issue 2, 2003). We also contacted experts in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized and quasi-randomized trials of topical cord care compared with no topical care, and comparisons between different forms of care.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers assessed trial quality and extracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-one studies (8959 participants) were included, the majority of which were from high-income countries. No systemic infections or deaths were observed in any of the studies reviewed. No difference was demonstrated between cords treated with antiseptics compared with dry cord care or placebo. There was a trend to reduced colonization with antibiotics compared to topical antiseptics and no treatment. Antiseptics prolonged the time to cord separation. Use of antiseptics was associated with a reduction in maternal concern about the cord.

REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS

Good trials in low-income settings are warranted. In high-income settings, there is limited research which has not shown an advantage of antibiotics or antiseptics over simply keeping the cord clean. Quality of evidence is low.

Role of antimicrobial applications to the umbilical cord in neonates to prevent bacterial colonization and infection: a review of the evidence

In developing countries umbilical cord infections constitute a major cause of neonatal morbidity and pose significant risk for mortality, whereas outbreaks of cord infections continue to occur in developed country nurseries. Cord infections in developing countries can be prevented through increasing access to tetanus toxoid immunization during pregnancy, promoting clean cord care and reducing harmful cord applications and behaviors. Interventions introduced in both developed and developing countries to reduce exposure of the cord to infectious pathogens include clean cord cutting, hand-washing before and after handling the baby, bathing of the infant with antimicrobial agents and application of antimicrobials to the cord. Despite the importance of umbilical cord care, both traditionally and medically, there have been few randomized trials investigating the impact of different cord care regimens on rates of local or systemic infections, particularly in developing countries. This review examines available data on umbilical cord care, with a particular focus on those comparing rates of bacterial colonization and/or rates of cord infection among neonates receiving different umbilical cord care regimens. Although most investigators agree that topical antimicrobials reduce bacterial colonization of the cord, a firm relationship between colonization and infection has not been established. Further research in developed countries, including follow-up beyond hospital discharge, is required before advising on "best cord care practices." The paucity of published reports from developing countries indicates the need to investigate the impact of antimicrobial applications on cord and systemic infections in a community-based, prospective manner.

Assessment of the umbilical cord outside of the delivery room. Part 2

The umbilical cord is crucial to the growth and development of the fetus. Careful inspection in the delivery room and throughout the newborn period is essential. Part 1 of this 2-part series, entitled "Look Before You Clamp: Delivery Room Examination of the Umbilical Cord" (Advances in Neonatal Care, Vol. 2, No. 1, pp 19-26), reviewed umbilical problems that present in the delivery room. A number of subtle but significant umbilical cord abnormalities present outside the delivery room. These abnormalities will be the focus of Part 2 of this series. A review of the embryologic development of the umbilical cord enhances the clinician's understanding of umbilical abnormalities that present in the newborn period. The process of umbilical cord separation is outlined. Conditions associated with delayed cord separation are discussed. A systematic approach to the physical examination of the umbilicus is offered, with an emphasis on early detection of abnormalities. Common and uncommon physical findings, such as omphalitis, periumbilical necrotizing fascitis, vitelline duct remnants, and urachal anomalies are presented along with select photographs. A brief discussion of the clinical implications for newborn care is provided for the practicing clinician.

Randomized trial of alcohol versus triple dye for umbilical cord care

Over a 4-month period, all infants admitted to the well-baby nursery were enrolled in a prospective study designed to compare cord separation times between infants treated with triple dye once, followed by daily alcohol application, to infants treated with daily alcohol application alone. Follow-up phone calls were done 7 days after discharge, with weekly calls until cord separation occurred. The objective was to determine whether the umbilical cord care regimen of triple dye followed by alcohol has an advantage over the alternative regimen of alcohol alone, with regard to cord separation, parenting, or healthcare caretaker preferences. In total, 634 infants were enrolled, with 599 infants (94%) completing the study. Infants in the alcohol alone group had a shorter cord separation time by 3 days (10 versus 13 days) (p < 0.0001). There was no reported increase in infection, and monetary savings were noted. We conclude that alcohol applied once a day appears to be a safe and effective means of promoting cord detachment.

Water for wound cleansing

BACKGROUND

Various solutions have been recommended for cleansing wounds, however normal saline is favoured as it is an isotonic solution and does not interfere with the normal healing process. Tap water is commonly used in the community for cleansing wounds because it is easily accessible, efficient and cost effective, however, there is an unresolved debate about its use.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review was to assess the effects of water compared to other solutions for wound cleansing.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials were identified by electronic searches of Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Trials Register, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register. Primary authors, company representatives and content experts were contacted to identify eligible studies. Reference lists from included trials were also searched.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised and quasi randomised controlled trials that compared the use of water with other solutions for wound cleansing were eligible for inclusion. Additional criteria were outcomes that included objective or subjective measures of wound infection or healing.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Trial selection, data extraction and quality assessment were carried out independently by two reviewers and checked by a third reviewer. Differences in opinion were settled by discussion. Some data were pooled using a random effects model.

MAIN RESULTS

Three trials were identified that compared rates of infection and healing in wounds cleansed with water and normal saline, two compared cleansing with no cleansing and one compared procaine spirit with water. There were no standard criteria for the assessment of wound infection across the trials which limited the ability to pool the data. The major comparisons were water vs normal saline, and tap water vs no cleansing. For chronic wounds, the odds of developing an infection when cleansed with tap water compared with normal saline was 0.16, 95 % Confidence Interval (CI) 0.01, 2.96. Use of tap water to cleanse acute wounds was associated with a lower rate of infection than saline (OR 0.52, 95 % CI 0.28, 0.96). No statistically significant differences in infection rates were seen when wounds were cleansed with tap water or not cleansed at all (OR 1.06, 95 % CI 0.06, 17.47). Similarly there was no difference in the infection rate in wounds cleansed with water or procaine spirit and those cleansed with isotonic saline, distilled water and boiled water (OR 0.55, 95 % CI 0.18,1.62).

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

Although the evidence is limited one trial has suggested that the use of tap water to cleanse acute wounds reduces the infection rate and other trials conclude that there is no difference in the infection and healing rates between wounds that were not cleansed and those cleansed with tap water and other solutions. However the quality of the tap water should be considered prior to its use and in the absence of potable tap water, boiled and cooled water as well as distilled water can be used as wound cleansing agents.

Does bathing newborns remove potentially harmful pathogens from the skin?

BACKGROUND

Newborn infants are routinely bathed after birth partly to reduce the possibility of transmitting potential pathogens to others. The extent to which a mild soap reduces the quantity and type of microbes found on the skin through normal colonization has not been reported. The objective of the study was to compare colonization rates between infants bathed in soap and water and infants bathed in plain water.

METHOD

One hundred and forty infants were randomly assigned to one group bathed in a mild pH neutral soap and water or to another group bathed in water alone. Microbiology swabs were taken on three occasions (before the first bath, 1 hour after the bath, and 24 hours after birth) from two sites (anterior fontanelle and umbilical area).

RESULTS

No difference occurred between groups on type or quantity of organisms found at each time period. Skin colonization is a function of time, and the quantity of organisms identified increased over time (Friedman A 2 = 111.379, df = 5, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Bathing with mild soap as opposed to bathing in water alone has minimal effect on skin bacterial colonization. Skin colonization increased over time. The findings did not support the efficacy of bathing with soap and water to reduce skin colonization of bacterial pathogens. Although the incidence of potential pathogens colonizing the skin during the first day of life is low and unlikely to pose a risk to healthy newborns, health care professionals may wish to wear gloves until the infant has been bathed.

Cord-care practice in Scotland

OBJECTIVE

To identify the range of policies, practices and rationale for umbilical-cord stump care in the NHS in Scotland.

DESIGN

A postal questionnaire survey completed in two stages. The first stage elicited the views of Heads of Midwifery/Senior Midwives, and the second stage the views of midwives, enrolled nurses and nursery nurses.

SETTING

NHS units in Scotland providing intrapartum care. They were separated into large and small units with small units having < or = 1000 deliveries per year (n = 178), and large units > 1000 deliveries per year (n = 300).

PARTICIPANTS

The Heads of Midwifery/Senior Midwives from the 51 units were invited to participate in the study and 49 (96.1%) replied. In stage two 512 maternity unit employees were sent questionnaires and 390 (76.2%) replied. These were six enrolled nurses, 20 nursery nurses and 360 midwives and four respondents of unspecified occupation.

MEASUREMENTS

The existence of cord-care policies and their rationale.

FINDINGS

About half of the units that responded had a written policy. Large units were four times more likely than small units to have a written policy. Both managers and staff reported that the most common policy/agreed practice was no specific care (cord observed and only cleaned if soiled). Where a written policy existed, less than one-half of the Heads of Midwifery/Senior Midwives and less than one third of the staff reported that the basis for this policy was research.

KEY CONCLUSIONS

Units with a written policy are in the minority and small units are far less likely to have such a policy. Wide variation exists in policy, practice and rationale. Diversity within and between units creates anxiety and disillusionment for practitioners. It may also cause confusion for patients who are exposed to different cord-care practices either as these change over time or because they use different units.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

The midwifery profession must examine this area of practice and determine how to address this lack of evidence. Further research is required to determine the most effective method of cord care and how best to put the findings into practice. Outstanding questions which beg further investigation are: How do cords heal and separate and what bacteria are naturally involved in this process? What constitutes an infected cord as opposed to a colonised cord?

Topical umbilical cord care at birth

BACKGROUND

Umbilical cord infection caused many neonatal deaths before aseptic techniques were used.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review was to assess the effects of topical cord care in preventing cord infection, illness and death.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group trials register, the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (Cochrane Library issue 4, 1997) and Medline. We also contacted experts in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised and quasi-randomised trials of topical cord care compared with no routine care, and comparisons between different forms of care.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers assessed trial quality and extracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

Ten studies were included, all from developed countries. No systemic infections or deaths were observed in any of the studies reviewed. Cord and other skin infections within six weeks of observation were not affected by use of antiseptics. There was a trend to reduced colonization with antibiotics compared to antiseptics and no treatment. Antiseptics prolonged the time to cord separation. Use of antiseptics was associated with a reduction in maternal concern about the cord.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

Simply keeping the cord clean appears to be as effective and safe as using antibiotics or antiseptics.

Neonatal skin care: the scientific basis for practice

OBJECTIVE

To review the literature addressing the care of neonatal skin.

DATA SOURCES

Computerized searches in MEDLINE and CINAHL, as well as references cited in articles reviewed. Key concepts in the searches included neonatal skin differences; neonatal skin and care practices for skin integrity; neonatal skin and toxicity; permeability; and contact irritant sensitization.

STUDY SELECTION

Articles and comprehensive works relevant to key concepts and published after 1963, with an emphasis on new findings from 1993 to 1999. One hundred two citations were identified as useful to this review.

DATA EXTRACTION

Data were extracted and organized under the following headings: anatomy and physiology of the skin; physiologic and anatomic differences in neonatal skin; nutritional deficiencies; skin care practices; and care of skin breakdown.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Newborns' skin is at risk for disruption of normal barrier function because of trauma. In light of available evidence about differences in neonatal skin development, clinical practice guidelines are suggested for baths, lubrication, antimicrobial skin disinfection, and adhesive removal. In addition, basic care practices are suggested for maintaining skin integrity, reducing exposure to potentially toxic substances, and promoting skin health beyond the neonatal period. Preventive care recommendations are made for reducing trauma, protecting the skin's immature barrier function, and promoting skin integrity.

CONCLUSIONS

This review generated evidence with which to create a new and comprehensive practice guideline for clinicians. Evaluation of the guideline is under way at 58 U.S. sites.

Neonatal skin care: the scientific basis for practice

OBJECTIVE

To review the literature addressing the care of neonatal skin.

DATA SOURCES

Computerized searches in MEDLINE and CINAHL, as well as references cited in articles reviewed. Key concepts in the searches included neonatal skin differences; neonatal skin and care practices for skin integrity; neonatal skin and toxicity; permeability; and contact irritant sensitization.

STUDY SELECTION

Articles and comprehensive works relevant to key concepts and published after 1963, with an emphasis on new findings from 1993 to 1999. One hundred two citations were identified as useful to this review.

DATA EXTRACTION

Data were extracted and organized under the following headings: anatomy and physiology of the skin; physiologic and anatomic differences in neonatal skin; nutritional deficiencies; skin care practices; and care of skin breakdown.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Newborns' skin is at risk for disruption of normal barrier function because of trauma. In light of available evidence about differences in neonatal skin development, clinical practice guidelines are suggested for baths, lubrication, antimicrobial skin disinfection, and adhesive removal. In addition, basic care practices are suggested for maintaining skin integrity, reducing exposure to potentially toxic substances, and promoting skin health beyond the neonatal period. Preventive care recommendations are made for reducing trauma, protecting the skin's immature barrier function, and promoting skin integrity.

CONCLUSIONS

This review generated evidence with which to create a new and comprehensive practice guideline for clinicians. Evaluation of the guideline is under way at 58 U.S. sites.

Care of the umbilical cord after birth: A limited review of recent literature

A 1992 meta-analysis did not find enough evidence to recommend one method of umbilical cord care as the 'best'. However, certain agents were deemed acceptable including triple dye, silver sulfadiazine and antibiotic ointments. In this paper, the authors sought to discover whether there was now evidence to support one specific method of cord care over others for the prevention of bacterial infection. After a limited search of the English language literature published in the past 10 years, little evidence was found to suggest that treatments to sterilize or speed up the drying of the umbilical cord were either routinely necessary or efficacious. Results from nine studies are summarized in this paper.