Use of plastic adhesive drapes during surgery for preventing surgical site infection

Webster, Joan and Alghamdi, Abdullah (2007) Use of plastic adhesive drapes during surgery for preventing surgical site infection. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 4: CD006353-1-CD006353-35. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD006353.pub2

Attached Files (Some files may be inaccessible until you login with your UQ eSpace credentials)
Name Description MIMEType Size Downloads
UQ179504_OA.pdf application/pdf 391.52KB 0

Author Webster, Joan
Alghamdi, Abdullah
Title Use of plastic adhesive drapes during surgery for preventing surgical site infection
Journal name Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews   Check publisher's open access policy
ISSN 1469-493X
Publication date 2007-01-01
Sub-type Critical review of research, literature review, critical commentary
DOI 10.1002/14651858.CD006353.pub2
Open Access Status File (Publisher version)
Issue 4
Start page CD006353-1
End page CD006353-35
Total pages 35
Place of publication Oxford, United Kingdom
Publisher John Wiley & Sons
Language eng
Subject C1
Formatted abstract
Surgical site infection has been estimated to occur in about 15% of clean surgery and 30% of contaminated surgery. Using plastic
adhesive drapes to protect the wound from organisms that may be present on the surrounding skin during surgery is one strategy
used to prevent surgical site infection. Results from non-randomised studies have produced conflicting results about the efficacy of this
approach but no systematic review has been conducted to date to guide clinical practice.
To assess the effect of adhesive drapes used during surgery on surgical site infection, cost, mortality and morbidity.
Search strategy

For this second update we searched the Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register (searched 10 November 2010), the Cochrane
Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library Issue 4, 2010), OvidMEDLINE (2008 toNovemberWeek 2 2010), Ovid
MEDLINE(R) In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations (November 9, 2010), Ovid EMBASE (2008 to 2010 Week 44), EBSCO
CINAHL (2008 to 5 October 2010).
Selection criteria
Randomised controlled trials comparing any plastic adhesive drape with no adhesive drape, used alone or in combination with woven
(material) drapes or disposable (paper) drapes in patients undergoing any type of surgery.
Data collection and analysis
Two review authors independently selected and assessed studies for trial quality and both independently extracted data. Study authors
were contacted for additional information.
Main results
We identified no new studies for this second update. The review includes five studies involving 3,082 participants comparing adhesive
drapes with no drape and two studies involving 1,113 participants comparing iodine-impregnated adhesive drapes with no drape. A
significantly higher proportion of patients in the adhesive drape group developed a surgical site infection when compared with no drape. (Risk ratio (RR) 1.23, 95% Confidence Intervals (CI) 1.02 to 1.48, p=0.03). Iodine-impregnated adhesive drapes had no effect
on the surgical site infection rate (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.064 to 1.66, p=0.89). Length of hospital stay was similar in the adhesive drape
and non-adhesive drape groups.
Authors’ conclusions
There was no evidence from the seven trials that plastic adhesive drapes reduces surgical site infection rate and some evidence that they increase infection rates. Further trials may be justified using blinded outcome assessment to examine the effect of adhesive drapes on surgical site infection based on different wound classifications.
Keyword Adhesive drapes
Surgical adhesions
Surgical site infection
Q-Index Code C1
Q-Index Status Provisional Code
Institutional Status Non-UQ
Additional Notes "Intervention Review". Published Online: 8 JUL 2009 Assessed as up-to-date: 14 NOV 2010

Document type: Journal Article
Sub-type: Critical review of research, literature review, critical commentary
Collections: ERA 2012 Admin Only
School of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work Publications
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 33 times in Thomson Reuters Web of Science Article | Citations
Scopus Citation Count Cited 72 times in Scopus Article | Citations
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Created: Fri, 31 Jul 2009, 00:59:24 EST by Vicki Percival on behalf of School of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work