Comparison of Cesarean Surgical Site Infection in Patients Treated with Cefazolin and Cefazolin-Azithromycin Regimes: A Quasi-experimental Study in a Developing Country

M. Mosadegh, N. Nouri, M. Ghasemi
{"title":"Comparison of Cesarean Surgical Site Infection in Patients Treated with Cefazolin and Cefazolin-Azithromycin Regimes: A Quasi-experimental Study in a Developing Country","authors":"M. Mosadegh, N. Nouri, M. Ghasemi","doi":"10.5812/iji.119790","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Prophylactic antibiotics effectively reduce the incidence of infection associated with cesarean section after labor. The use of a first-generation cephalosporin for antibiotic prophylaxis has been suggested in these patients, but in some studies, increasing the spectrum of antibiotic prophylaxis by adding another antibiotic to standard cephalosporin may provide greater protection against post-cesarean wound infections. Objectives: The present study aimed to compare the effects of conventional prophylaxis with cefazolin with a combination of cefazolin and azithromycin in reducing wound infection. Methods: In this quasi-experimental study, 200 cesarean section candidates admitted to Ali Ibn Abi Taleb Hospital in Zahedan, Iran, in 2019 - 2020 were divided into two groups of 100 patients. The control group received cefazolin alone, and the intervention group received cefazolin and azithromycin. Finally, in addition to demographic factors, various underlying diseases, causes of cesarean section, non-infectious wound complications, and post-surgery wound infection were investigated. Results: The two groups were homogenized in terms of age and BMI of patients. Surgical wound infection occurred after cesarean section in 3% of patients in the control group. Only 1% of infections were observed in patients in the intervention group, and the two groups had a statistically significant difference (P = 0.01). Conclusions: Compared with cefazolin alone, the combination of cefazolin and azithromycin was more effective in preventing cesarean section wound infection. Therefore, the combined use of these two antibiotics instead of cefazolin alone is recommended for this desirable clinical outcome.","PeriodicalId":13989,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Infection","volume":"43 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Infection","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5812/iji.119790","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background: Prophylactic antibiotics effectively reduce the incidence of infection associated with cesarean section after labor. The use of a first-generation cephalosporin for antibiotic prophylaxis has been suggested in these patients, but in some studies, increasing the spectrum of antibiotic prophylaxis by adding another antibiotic to standard cephalosporin may provide greater protection against post-cesarean wound infections. Objectives: The present study aimed to compare the effects of conventional prophylaxis with cefazolin with a combination of cefazolin and azithromycin in reducing wound infection. Methods: In this quasi-experimental study, 200 cesarean section candidates admitted to Ali Ibn Abi Taleb Hospital in Zahedan, Iran, in 2019 - 2020 were divided into two groups of 100 patients. The control group received cefazolin alone, and the intervention group received cefazolin and azithromycin. Finally, in addition to demographic factors, various underlying diseases, causes of cesarean section, non-infectious wound complications, and post-surgery wound infection were investigated. Results: The two groups were homogenized in terms of age and BMI of patients. Surgical wound infection occurred after cesarean section in 3% of patients in the control group. Only 1% of infections were observed in patients in the intervention group, and the two groups had a statistically significant difference (P = 0.01). Conclusions: Compared with cefazolin alone, the combination of cefazolin and azithromycin was more effective in preventing cesarean section wound infection. Therefore, the combined use of these two antibiotics instead of cefazolin alone is recommended for this desirable clinical outcome.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
头孢唑林和头孢唑林-阿奇霉素治疗剖宫产手术部位感染的比较:发展中国家的一项准实验研究
背景:预防性使用抗生素可有效降低剖宫产术后感染的发生率。已建议在这些患者中使用第一代头孢菌素进行抗生素预防,但在一些研究中,通过在标准头孢菌素中添加另一种抗生素来增加抗生素预防的范围,可能会对剖宫产后伤口感染提供更大的保护。目的:本研究旨在比较头孢唑林常规预防与头孢唑林联合阿奇霉素减少伤口感染的效果。方法:将2019 - 2020年伊朗扎黑丹Ali Ibn Abi Taleb医院收治的200例剖宫产患者分为两组,每组100例。对照组给予头孢唑林单独治疗,干预组给予头孢唑林联合阿奇霉素治疗。最后,除了人口因素外,还调查了各种潜在疾病、剖宫产的原因、非感染性伤口并发症和术后伤口感染。结果:两组患者年龄、BMI均为均匀化。对照组剖宫产术后创面感染发生率为3%。干预组患者感染发生率仅为1%,两组差异有统计学意义(P = 0.01)。结论:与单用头孢唑林相比,头孢唑林联合阿奇霉素预防剖宫产切口感染的效果更好。因此,建议联合使用这两种抗生素,而不是单独使用头孢唑林,以获得理想的临床结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Evaluation of Antibiotic Susceptibility, Carbapenemase and Metallobetalactamase-producing Strains of Acinetobacter baumannii Isolated from Hospitalized Patients in Zahedan During 2019 - 2022 Associations Between Blood Group and COVID-19 Mortality, Severity, and Length of Hospitalization Pulmonary Hemorrhage in Neonates with COVID-19 Computerized Tomography Scan Findings in Pediatric Patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019 Antibiotic Resistance Pattern of Urinary Tract Infections Among Patients with Recent Antibiotic Use: A Cross-sectional Study
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1