Anglia Ruskin Research Online (ARRO)
Browse

Aseptic versus clean technique during wound management? Systematic review with meta-analysis

Download (813.1 kB)
journal contribution
posted on 2025-07-21, 15:04 authored by Edward Purssell, Rose Gallagher, Dinah Gould
<p dir="ltr">The management of wounds by health professionals usually involves aseptic technique. An alternative is the use of clean techniques where the risk of infection is minimised but use of non-sterile materials is considered permissible. This systematic review and meta-analysis compares these two approaches. Nine studies met the inclusion criteria. Overall risk of bias was judged to be low. The random-effects relative risk of infection for clean dressings rather than aseptic dressings was 0.86 (95% CI 0.67, 1.12). There was little evidence of statistical heterogeneity, although the small number of infections in either group resulted in wide confidence intervals. The 95% prediction interval for future studies was 0.63, 1.18. There was therefore no evidence showing inferiority of clean techniques compared to aseptic methods. Before clinical studies are undertaken with higher risk procedures, laboratory simulations should explore safety by investigating the potential for pathogen transmission at each stage in the dressing procedure</p>

History

Refereed

  • Yes

Volume

34

Page range

1-12

Publication title

International Journal of Environmental Health Research

ISSN

1369-1619

Publisher

Informa UK Limited

File version

  • Accepted version

Language

  • eng

Legacy creation date

2023-07-06

Affiliated with

  • Faculty of Health, Medicine & Social Care Outputs

Usage metrics

    ARU Outputs

    Exports

    RefWorks
    BibTeX
    Ref. manager
    Endnote
    DataCite
    NLM
    DC