Chlorhexidine Gluconate Versus Povidone Iodine at Cesarean Delivery: a Randomized Controlled Trial
Public ClinicalTrials.gov record NCT01975805. Field values are reproduced from the official study page; the official ClinicalTrials.gov record remains the source of truth for eligibility, enrollment, and contact information.
Data is sourced from official ClinicalTrials.gov public API records. Always review the official ClinicalTrials.gov record for the latest information.
Official title
To Determine the Difference in Positive Bacterial Cultures in Cesarean Sections With 2% Chlorhexidine- Gluconate, 70% Isopropyl Alcohol (Chloraprep) vs. Povidone-iodine 10% (Betadine) Preoperative Surgical Scrub
Brief summary
Reproduced verbatim from the official ClinicalTrials.gov record. Not medical advice.
Currently there are no published studies comparing the efficacy of Chloraprep and povidone-iodine in decreasing postoperative- wound infection in cesarean sections. However, there have been studies involving other types of surgery that have compared the efficacy of different types of preoperative cleansing agents in preventing postoperative wound infection. These studies have shown that controversy exists over which antiseptic skin preparation is the most effective for preventing postoperative surgical wound infections. The standard of care at Los Angeles County Hospital for preoperative skin antiseptic in cesarean sections is povidone- iodine 10% (betadine), however many other hospitals have made the transition to using Chloraprep. In an attempt to improve on the current standard of care, we propose a quality improvement prospective randomized study to compare the difference in postoperative wound complications with the use of povidone- iodine and Chloraprep as a preoperative antiseptic in cesarean sections. We hypothesize that Chloraprep will be better than Betadine at reducing the incidence of positive bacterial cultures following cesarean sections.
Study identification
- NCT ID
- NCT01975805
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Not applicable
- Enrollment
- 60 participants
Conditions and interventions
Conditions
Eligibility (public fields only)
- Age range
- 18 Years to 45 Years
- Sex
- Female
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepts healthy volunteers
This page does not interpret eligibility. Detailed inclusion and exclusion criteria are on the official ClinicalTrials.gov record.
Study timeline
- Start date
- Dec 31, 2009
- Primary completion
- Feb 29, 2012
- Completion
- Apr 30, 2012
- Last update posted
- Nov 4, 2013
2010 – 2012
United States locations
- U.S. sites
- 1
- U.S. states
- 1
- U.S. cities
- 1
| Facility | City | State | ZIP | Site status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| University of Southern California | Los Angeles | California | 90027 | — |
Site contact phone numbers, emails, and investigator names are intentionally not displayed here. Open the official ClinicalTrials.gov record for site contact information.
About this trial record page
- What this page shows
- Public field values for ClinicalTrials.gov record NCT01975805, including study identification, conditions, interventions, eligibility (age, sex, healthy volunteer), timeline, and U.S. site list.
- What this page does not do
- No medical advice, eligibility judgments, treatment recommendations, study quality scoring, or AI-generated medical summaries. No site contact phone numbers, emails, or investigator names.
- Where the data comes from
- Sourced from the official ClinicalTrials.gov public API. The official record is the source of truth.
- Last refresh
- Last update posted Nov 4, 2013 · Synced Sep 5, 2026
Related: full search, browse by condition, browse by drug or therapy, browse by sponsor, browse by U.S. city.
Open the official record
The complete protocol, eligibility criteria, and contact information for NCT01975805 live on ClinicalTrials.gov.