We have located links that may give you full text access.
CLINICAL TRIAL
COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
MULTICENTER STUDY
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
RESEARCH SUPPORT, NON-U.S. GOV'T
Dry Care Versus Antiseptics for Umbilical Cord Care: A Cluster Randomized Trial.
Pediatrics 2017 January
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: In developed countries, where omphalitis has become rare and related mortality nil, benefits of antiseptic use in umbilical cord care have not been demonstrated. We aimed to assess the noninferiority of dry care compared with antiseptics in France where antiseptic use is widespread.
METHODS: We conducted a noninferiority, cluster-randomized, 2-period crossover trial, in 6 French university maternity units including all infants born after 36 weeks' gestation. Maternity units were randomly assigned to provide either their usual antiseptic care or a dry care umbilical cord method for a 4-month period, and then units switched to the alternate cord cleansing method for a 4-month period. The primary outcome was neonatal omphalitis, adjudicated by an independent blinded committee based on all available photographs, clinical, and bacteriological data. We used a noninferiority margin of 0.4%. Analysis was performed per protocol and by intention to treat.
RESULTS: Among 8698 participants, omphalitis occurred in 3 of 4293 (0.07%) newborns in the dry care group and in none of the 4404 newborns in the antiseptic care group (crude difference: 0.07; 95% confidence interval: -0.03 to 0.21). Late neonatal infection, parental appreciation of difficulty in care, and time to separation of the cord were not significantly different between the 2 groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Dry cord was noninferior to the use of antiseptics in preventing omphalitis in full-term newborns in a developed country. Antiseptic use in umbilical cord care is therefore unnecessary, constraining, and expensive in high-income countries and may be replaced by dry care.
METHODS: We conducted a noninferiority, cluster-randomized, 2-period crossover trial, in 6 French university maternity units including all infants born after 36 weeks' gestation. Maternity units were randomly assigned to provide either their usual antiseptic care or a dry care umbilical cord method for a 4-month period, and then units switched to the alternate cord cleansing method for a 4-month period. The primary outcome was neonatal omphalitis, adjudicated by an independent blinded committee based on all available photographs, clinical, and bacteriological data. We used a noninferiority margin of 0.4%. Analysis was performed per protocol and by intention to treat.
RESULTS: Among 8698 participants, omphalitis occurred in 3 of 4293 (0.07%) newborns in the dry care group and in none of the 4404 newborns in the antiseptic care group (crude difference: 0.07; 95% confidence interval: -0.03 to 0.21). Late neonatal infection, parental appreciation of difficulty in care, and time to separation of the cord were not significantly different between the 2 groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Dry cord was noninferior to the use of antiseptics in preventing omphalitis in full-term newborns in a developed country. Antiseptic use in umbilical cord care is therefore unnecessary, constraining, and expensive in high-income countries and may be replaced by dry care.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app