Jethwa, Trisha E

Background: Surgical site infection (SSI) is an adverse event that can lead to increased pain, increased cost, risk of death, and decreased patient satisfaction. Studies have investigated the best solutions to prevent SSI. Chlorhexidine has been suggested as the most efficacious antiseptic. However, scant data exist on application of antiseptic solutions and effectiveness of concentric versus back-and-forth strokes. Because a specific method may result in better outcomes, we aimed to review the literature to compare these two techniques. Methods: PubMed-indexed articles were reviewed using specific keywords, including “back-and-forth,” “concentric circle,” “chlorhexidine,” “iodine,” “surgical site infection,” “antiseptic,” and “skin preparation.” Because data showing the correlation between SSI and application method of skin preparation solutions were scant, studies that described skin preparation method but analyzed other types of infection, bacteremia, or colonization were also included in this review. Results: No consensus was found regarding the application method. Two articles showed the superiority of chlorhexidine applied using the back-and-forth technique, whereas one demonstrated the superiority of iodine applied in concentric circles. Conclusions: The method of applying antiseptic solution may be just as important as the choice of solution. More studies are needed to assess method of antiseptic application.

AbstractVenous thromboembolism is often treated with direct oral anticoagulants. In order for direct oral anticoagulants to be effective, patients must adhere to a specific dosing strategy. We report a case of apixaban failure, the clinical workup that ensued, and the eventual discovery of unsuccessful medication adherence as the cause.