Comparative efficacy of three antiseptics as surgical skin preparations in dogs
Objective To compare the antimicrobial efficacy of a 2% chlorhexidine gluconate and 70% ethanol solution (CG+A) with that of F10 Skin Prep Solution (F10) and electrochemically activated water (EAW) when used as a surgical preparation in canine patients. Study design Prospective randomized clinical s...
Uložené v:
| Vydané v: | Veterinary surgery Ročník 47; číslo 6; s. 792 - 801 |
|---|---|
| Hlavní autori: | , , , , |
| Médium: | Journal Article |
| Jazyk: | English |
| Vydavateľské údaje: |
United States
Blackwell Publishing Ltd
01.08.2018
|
| Predmet: | |
| ISSN: | 0161-3499, 1532-950X, 1532-950X |
| On-line prístup: | Získať plný text |
| Tagy: |
Pridať tag
Žiadne tagy, Buďte prvý, kto otaguje tento záznam!
|
| Abstract | Objective
To compare the antimicrobial efficacy of a 2% chlorhexidine gluconate and 70% ethanol solution (CG+A) with that of F10 Skin Prep Solution (F10) and electrochemically activated water (EAW) when used as a surgical preparation in canine patients.
Study design
Prospective randomized clinical study.
Sample population
One hundred sixteen dogs presented for ovariohysterectomy.
Methods
Dogs were randomly divided into 1 of the 3 antiseptic groups (CG+A, F10, EAW). Skin samples with replicating organism detection and counting plates were taken at 4 different perioperative sites and time intervals (postskin preparation, postskin antisepsis, 2 hours after the second sample, and at the end of surgery) during ovariohysterectomies performed by students. The colony forming unit (CFU) counts from each sample were quantified according to the level of bacterial contamination. Zero CFU was defined as no contamination, 1‐12 CFU was defined as low contamination, and greater than 12 CFU was defined as high contamination. The 3 antiseptics were compared with respect to the level of contamination.
Results
There was no difference in the level of colonization between the antiseptics at the first sampling time (P = .454). However, the level of contamination for CG+A was lower compared with F10 and EAW at the second, third, and fourth sampling times (P = .001, P = .01, P = .02, respectively).
Conclusion
CG+A was more effective at achieving a zero CFU count and low levels of contamination compared with F10 and EAW for surgical preparation in dogs undergoing ovariohysterectomy.
Clinical significance
This study does not provide evidence to support the use of F10 and EAW instead of CG+A for the surgical skin preparation of dogs undergoing ovariohysterectomy. |
|---|---|
| AbstractList | To compare the antimicrobial efficacy of a 2% chlorhexidine gluconate and 70% ethanol solution (CG+A) with that of F10 Skin Prep Solution (F10) and electrochemically activated water (EAW) when used as a surgical preparation in canine patients.OBJECTIVETo compare the antimicrobial efficacy of a 2% chlorhexidine gluconate and 70% ethanol solution (CG+A) with that of F10 Skin Prep Solution (F10) and electrochemically activated water (EAW) when used as a surgical preparation in canine patients.Prospective randomized clinical study.STUDY DESIGNProspective randomized clinical study.One hundred sixteen dogs presented for ovariohysterectomy.SAMPLE POPULATIONOne hundred sixteen dogs presented for ovariohysterectomy.Dogs were randomly divided into 1 of the 3 antiseptic groups (CG+A, F10, EAW). Skin samples with replicating organism detection and counting plates were taken at 4 different perioperative sites and time intervals (postskin preparation, postskin antisepsis, 2 hours after the second sample, and at the end of surgery) during ovariohysterectomies performed by students. The colony forming unit (CFU) counts from each sample were quantified according to the level of bacterial contamination. Zero CFU was defined as no contamination, 1-12 CFU was defined as low contamination, and greater than 12 CFU was defined as high contamination. The 3 antiseptics were compared with respect to the level of contamination.METHODSDogs were randomly divided into 1 of the 3 antiseptic groups (CG+A, F10, EAW). Skin samples with replicating organism detection and counting plates were taken at 4 different perioperative sites and time intervals (postskin preparation, postskin antisepsis, 2 hours after the second sample, and at the end of surgery) during ovariohysterectomies performed by students. The colony forming unit (CFU) counts from each sample were quantified according to the level of bacterial contamination. Zero CFU was defined as no contamination, 1-12 CFU was defined as low contamination, and greater than 12 CFU was defined as high contamination. The 3 antiseptics were compared with respect to the level of contamination.There was no difference in the level of colonization between the antiseptics at the first sampling time (P = .454). However, the level of contamination for CG+A was lower compared with F10 and EAW at the second, third, and fourth sampling times (P = .001, P = .01, P = .02, respectively).RESULTSThere was no difference in the level of colonization between the antiseptics at the first sampling time (P = .454). However, the level of contamination for CG+A was lower compared with F10 and EAW at the second, third, and fourth sampling times (P = .001, P = .01, P = .02, respectively).CG+A was more effective at achieving a zero CFU count and low levels of contamination compared with F10 and EAW for surgical preparation in dogs undergoing ovariohysterectomy.CONCLUSIONCG+A was more effective at achieving a zero CFU count and low levels of contamination compared with F10 and EAW for surgical preparation in dogs undergoing ovariohysterectomy.This study does not provide evidence to support the use of F10 and EAW instead of CG+A for the surgical skin preparation of dogs undergoing ovariohysterectomy.CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCEThis study does not provide evidence to support the use of F10 and EAW instead of CG+A for the surgical skin preparation of dogs undergoing ovariohysterectomy. To compare the antimicrobial efficacy of a 2% chlorhexidine gluconate and 70% ethanol solution (CG+A) with that of F10 Skin Prep Solution (F10) and electrochemically activated water (EAW) when used as a surgical preparation in canine patients. Prospective randomized clinical study. One hundred sixteen dogs presented for ovariohysterectomy. Dogs were randomly divided into 1 of the 3 antiseptic groups (CG+A, F10, EAW). Skin samples with replicating organism detection and counting plates were taken at 4 different perioperative sites and time intervals (postskin preparation, postskin antisepsis, 2 hours after the second sample, and at the end of surgery) during ovariohysterectomies performed by students. The colony forming unit (CFU) counts from each sample were quantified according to the level of bacterial contamination. Zero CFU was defined as no contamination, 1-12 CFU was defined as low contamination, and greater than 12 CFU was defined as high contamination. The 3 antiseptics were compared with respect to the level of contamination. There was no difference in the level of colonization between the antiseptics at the first sampling time (P = .454). However, the level of contamination for CG+A was lower compared with F10 and EAW at the second, third, and fourth sampling times (P = .001, P = .01, P = .02, respectively). CG+A was more effective at achieving a zero CFU count and low levels of contamination compared with F10 and EAW for surgical preparation in dogs undergoing ovariohysterectomy. This study does not provide evidence to support the use of F10 and EAW instead of CG+A for the surgical skin preparation of dogs undergoing ovariohysterectomy. OBJECTIVE: To compare the antimicrobial efficacy of a 2% chlorhexidine gluconate and 70% ethanol solution (CG+A) with that of F10 Skin Prep Solution (F10) and electrochemically activated water (EAW) when used as a surgical preparation in canine patients. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective randomized clinical study. SAMPLE POPULATION: One hundred sixteen dogs presented for ovariohysterectomy. METHODS: Dogs were randomly divided into 1 of the 3 antiseptic groups (CG+A, F10, EAW). Skin samples with replicating organism detection and counting plates were taken at 4 different perioperative sites and time intervals (postskin preparation, postskin antisepsis, 2 hours after the second sample, and at the end of surgery) during ovariohysterectomies performed by students. The colony forming unit (CFU) counts from each sample were quantified according to the level of bacterial contamination. Zero CFU was defined as no contamination, 1‐12 CFU was defined as low contamination, and greater than 12 CFU was defined as high contamination. The 3 antiseptics were compared with respect to the level of contamination. RESULTS: There was no difference in the level of colonization between the antiseptics at the first sampling time (P = .454). However, the level of contamination for CG+A was lower compared with F10 and EAW at the second, third, and fourth sampling times (P = .001, P = .01, P = .02, respectively). CONCLUSION: CG+A was more effective at achieving a zero CFU count and low levels of contamination compared with F10 and EAW for surgical preparation in dogs undergoing ovariohysterectomy. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: This study does not provide evidence to support the use of F10 and EAW instead of CG+A for the surgical skin preparation of dogs undergoing ovariohysterectomy. ObjectiveTo compare the antimicrobial efficacy of a 2% chlorhexidine gluconate and 70% ethanol solution (CG+A) with that of F10 Skin Prep Solution (F10) and electrochemically activated water (EAW) when used as a surgical preparation in canine patients.Study designProspective randomized clinical study.Sample populationOne hundred sixteen dogs presented for ovariohysterectomy.MethodsDogs were randomly divided into 1 of the 3 antiseptic groups (CG+A, F10, EAW). Skin samples with replicating organism detection and counting plates were taken at 4 different perioperative sites and time intervals (postskin preparation, postskin antisepsis, 2 hours after the second sample, and at the end of surgery) during ovariohysterectomies performed by students. The colony forming unit (CFU) counts from each sample were quantified according to the level of bacterial contamination. Zero CFU was defined as no contamination, 1‐12 CFU was defined as low contamination, and greater than 12 CFU was defined as high contamination. The 3 antiseptics were compared with respect to the level of contamination.ResultsThere was no difference in the level of colonization between the antiseptics at the first sampling time (P = .454). However, the level of contamination for CG+A was lower compared with F10 and EAW at the second, third, and fourth sampling times (P = .001, P = .01, P = .02, respectively).ConclusionCG+A was more effective at achieving a zero CFU count and low levels of contamination compared with F10 and EAW for surgical preparation in dogs undergoing ovariohysterectomy.Clinical significanceThis study does not provide evidence to support the use of F10 and EAW instead of CG+A for the surgical skin preparation of dogs undergoing ovariohysterectomy. Objective To compare the antimicrobial efficacy of a 2% chlorhexidine gluconate and 70% ethanol solution (CG+A) with that of F10 Skin Prep Solution (F10) and electrochemically activated water (EAW) when used as a surgical preparation in canine patients. Study design Prospective randomized clinical study. Sample population One hundred sixteen dogs presented for ovariohysterectomy. Methods Dogs were randomly divided into 1 of the 3 antiseptic groups (CG+A, F10, EAW). Skin samples with replicating organism detection and counting plates were taken at 4 different perioperative sites and time intervals (postskin preparation, postskin antisepsis, 2 hours after the second sample, and at the end of surgery) during ovariohysterectomies performed by students. The colony forming unit (CFU) counts from each sample were quantified according to the level of bacterial contamination. Zero CFU was defined as no contamination, 1‐12 CFU was defined as low contamination, and greater than 12 CFU was defined as high contamination. The 3 antiseptics were compared with respect to the level of contamination. Results There was no difference in the level of colonization between the antiseptics at the first sampling time (P = .454). However, the level of contamination for CG+A was lower compared with F10 and EAW at the second, third, and fourth sampling times (P = .001, P = .01, P = .02, respectively). Conclusion CG+A was more effective at achieving a zero CFU count and low levels of contamination compared with F10 and EAW for surgical preparation in dogs undergoing ovariohysterectomy. Clinical significance This study does not provide evidence to support the use of F10 and EAW instead of CG+A for the surgical skin preparation of dogs undergoing ovariohysterectomy. |
| Author | Henton, Maryke M. Boucher, Charles Becker, Piet J. Hartman, Marthinus J. Kirberger, Robert M. |
| Author_xml | – sequence: 1 givenname: Charles surname: Boucher fullname: Boucher, Charles email: charlie.boucher@up.ac.za organization: University of Pretoria – sequence: 2 givenname: Maryke M. surname: Henton fullname: Henton, Maryke M. organization: Vetdiagnostix Gauteng – sequence: 3 givenname: Piet J. surname: Becker fullname: Becker, Piet J. organization: University of Pretoria – sequence: 4 givenname: Robert M. surname: Kirberger fullname: Kirberger, Robert M. organization: University of Pretoria – sequence: 5 givenname: Marthinus J. surname: Hartman fullname: Hartman, Marthinus J. organization: University of Pretoria |
| BackLink | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30004127$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed |
| BookMark | eNqF0UtP3DAQB3CrAsHyOPQLVJZ6KYfA2I4d51iteElIHHiIW-R1xtQ0G6d2QrXfHsMCByRaX2xLvxlp_rNDNvrQIyFfGRyyfI4e03TIeM3EFzJjUvCilnC3QWbAFCtEWdfbZCelBwCoy1JskW2RnyXj1YxczsNyMNGM_hEpOuetsSsaHB1_RURq-tEnHEZvEzWJpineZ9HR9Nv3dIi4Lg19ovnfhvu0Rzad6RLuv9675Obk-Hp-Vlxcnp7Pf14UVmglCillXVotmZELbYEzBG2dQmZqBdViocC1rbMcpap0W0FZKwcVK7UzRirLxC75se47xPBnwjQ2S58sdp3pMUyp4TkHxXUO4P8UKuBCA5eZfv9AH8IU-zxIbpgR01pDVt9e1bRYYtsM0S9NXDVvqWZwsAY2hpQiunfCoHneWJM31rxsLNujD9b68SXTMRrf_avir-9w9Xnr5vbqZl3xBBy7pYc |
| CitedBy_id | crossref_primary_10_17533_udea_rccp_e358327 crossref_primary_10_1111_vsu_13468 crossref_primary_10_1371_journal_pone_0293211 crossref_primary_10_3390_ani10122265 crossref_primary_10_14202_vetworld_2024_2451_2459 |
| Cites_doi | 10.1111/j.1532-950X.2011.00846.x 10.1136/bmj.4.5892.586 10.1016/0195-6701(92)90139-D 10.1093/infdis/63.3.301 10.4102/jsava.v79i1.238 10.1086/502194 10.1111/j.1532-950X.1996.tb01448.x 10.1016/S0195-6701(08)60008-0 10.1111/j.1532-950X.1988.tb00995.x 10.3138/jvme.38.4.408 10.1111/j.1365-2672.2005.02664.x 10.1128/jcm.21.6.991-992.1985 10.1111/j.1532-950X.1988.tb00278.x 10.1177/0310057X0803600404 10.1016/j.surneu.2007.10.026 10.1001/archsurg.1982.01380260051009 10.1111/j.1532-950X.1990.tb01136.x 10.1016/j.suc.2009.01.001 10.1111/j.1532-950X.2011.00934.x 10.1111/j.1532-950X.1990.tb01137.x 10.1016/0196-6553(95)90070-5 10.1016/0195-6701(80)90043-2 10.1186/1471-2334-5-48 10.1111/j.1365-2672.2009.04233.x 10.1016/0002-9610(71)90199-1 10.2460/javma.1997.210.09.1302 10.4045/tidsskr.14.1041 10.1111/vsu.12438 10.1186/1476-0711-7-20 10.1111/j.1532-950X.2004.04086.x 10.1159/000318264 10.4315/0362-028X-71.9.1934 10.1016/S0195-6701(98)90078-0 10.1016/j.jhin.2011.08.016 10.1086/430063 10.7547/87507315-85-8-439 10.1007/BF01644264 10.2460/ajvr.1978.39.09.1487 10.1016/S0039-6109(16)42031-1 10.3136/fstr.11.135 10.1016/j.jhsa.2009.03.008 10.1111/j.2042-3292.2010.00203.x 10.1128/CMR.00112-16 10.1111/vsu.12566 10.1016/S0195-5616(98)82003-2 |
| ContentType | Journal Article |
| Copyright | 2018 The American College of Veterinary Surgeons 2018 The American College of Veterinary Surgeons. |
| Copyright_xml | – notice: 2018 The American College of Veterinary Surgeons – notice: 2018 The American College of Veterinary Surgeons. |
| DBID | AAYXX CITATION CGR CUY CVF ECM EIF NPM 8FD FR3 M7Z P64 7X8 7S9 L.6 |
| DOI | 10.1111/vsu.12913 |
| DatabaseName | CrossRef Medline MEDLINE MEDLINE (Ovid) MEDLINE MEDLINE PubMed Technology Research Database Engineering Research Database Biochemistry Abstracts 1 Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts MEDLINE - Academic AGRICOLA AGRICOLA - Academic |
| DatabaseTitle | CrossRef MEDLINE Medline Complete MEDLINE with Full Text PubMed MEDLINE (Ovid) Biochemistry Abstracts 1 Engineering Research Database Technology Research Database Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts MEDLINE - Academic AGRICOLA AGRICOLA - Academic |
| DatabaseTitleList | MEDLINE - Academic MEDLINE AGRICOLA Biochemistry Abstracts 1 |
| Database_xml | – sequence: 1 dbid: NPM name: PubMed url: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed sourceTypes: Index Database – sequence: 2 dbid: 7X8 name: MEDLINE - Academic url: https://search.proquest.com/medline sourceTypes: Aggregation Database |
| DeliveryMethod | fulltext_linktorsrc |
| Discipline | Veterinary Medicine |
| EISSN | 1532-950X |
| EndPage | 801 |
| ExternalDocumentID | 30004127 10_1111_vsu_12913 VSU12913 |
| Genre | article Journal Article Comparative Study Clinical Trial, Veterinary |
| GrantInformation_xml | – fundername: Companion Animal Clinical Studies Research Fund of the University of Pretoria – fundername: National Research Fund of Prof Robert Kirberger – fundername: South African Veterinary Foundation |
| GroupedDBID | --- .3N .GA .Y3 05W 0R~ 10A 123 1OB 1OC 29Q 31~ 33P 36B 3SF 4.4 50Y 50Z 51W 51X 52M 52N 52O 52P 52S 52T 52U 52W 52X 53G 5HH 5LA 5VS 66C 702 7PT 8-0 8-1 8-3 8-4 8-5 8UM 930 A03 AAESR AAEVG AAHBH AAHHS AAHQN AAMNL AANHP AANLZ AAONW AASGY AAXRX AAYCA AAZKR ABCQN ABCUV ABEML ABJNI ABPVW ACAHQ ACBWZ ACCFJ ACCZN ACFBH ACGFS ACIWK ACPOU ACPRK ACRPL ACSCC ACXBN ACXQS ACYXJ ADBBV ADEOM ADIZJ ADKYN ADMGS ADNMO ADOZA ADXAS ADZMN AEEZP AEIGN AEIMD AENEX AEQDE AEUQT AEUYR AFEBI AFFPM AFGKR AFPWT AFRAH AFWVQ AFZJQ AHBTC AHEFC AITYG AIURR AIWBW AJBDE AJXKR ALAGY ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS ALUQN ALVPJ AMBMR AMYDB ATUGU AUFTA AZBYB AZFZN AZVAB BAFTC BDRZF BFHJK BHBCM BMNLL BMXJE BNHUX BROTX BRXPI BY8 C45 CAG COF CS3 D-E D-F DCZOG DPXWK DR2 DRFUL DRSTM DU5 EBS ECGQY EJD EYRJQ F00 F01 F04 F5P FEDTE G-S G.N GODZA H.T H.X HF~ HGLYW HVGLF HVLQZ HZI HZ~ IX1 J0M K48 LATKE LC2 LC3 LEEKS LH4 LITHE LOXES LP6 LP7 LUTES LW6 LYRES M41 MEWTI MK4 MRFUL MRSTM MSFUL MSSTM MXFUL MXSTM N04 N05 N9A NF~ O66 O9- OIG OVD P2P P2W P2X P4D PALCI PQQKQ Q.N Q11 QB0 R.K RIWAO RJQFR ROL RX1 SAMSI SUPJJ TEORI UB1 W8V W99 WBKPD WIH WIK WOHZO WOIKV WPGGZ WQJ WRC WXSBR XG1 ZZTAW ~IA ~KM ~WT AAMMB AAYXX AEFGJ AEYWJ AGHNM AGQPQ AGXDD AGYGG AIDQK AIDYY AIQQE CITATION O8X CGR CUY CVF ECM EIF NPM 8FD FR3 M7Z P64 7X8 7S9 L.6 |
| ID | FETCH-LOGICAL-c3863-55594c851a5b8c021e08cf6e1a9607bb60fddfc2e5678d70496f07148faa56c13 |
| IEDL.DBID | DRFUL |
| ISICitedReferencesCount | 6 |
| ISICitedReferencesURI | http://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=Summon&SrcAuth=ProQuest&DestLinkType=CitingArticles&DestApp=WOS_CPL&KeyUT=000444424400006&url=https%3A%2F%2Fcvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com%2F%23%21%2Fsearch%3Fho%3Df%26include.ft.matches%3Dt%26l%3Dnull%26q%3D |
| ISSN | 0161-3499 1532-950X |
| IngestDate | Fri Jul 11 18:29:30 EDT 2025 Fri Jul 11 07:53:35 EDT 2025 Fri Jul 25 09:25:19 EDT 2025 Thu Apr 03 07:04:44 EDT 2025 Sat Nov 29 07:44:45 EST 2025 Tue Nov 18 20:56:27 EST 2025 Wed Jan 22 17:06:07 EST 2025 |
| IsPeerReviewed | true |
| IsScholarly | true |
| Issue | 6 |
| Language | English |
| License | 2018 The American College of Veterinary Surgeons. |
| LinkModel | DirectLink |
| MergedId | FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c3863-55594c851a5b8c021e08cf6e1a9607bb60fddfc2e5678d70496f07148faa56c13 |
| Notes | Funding information South African Veterinary Foundation; National Research Fund of Prof Robert Kirberger; Companion Animal Clinical Studies Research Fund of the University of Pretoria ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 14 ObjectType-Undefined-1 content type line 23 ObjectType-Article-3 |
| PMID | 30004127 |
| PQID | 2102318880 |
| PQPubID | 47807 |
| PageCount | 10 |
| ParticipantIDs | proquest_miscellaneous_2153628161 proquest_miscellaneous_2070238025 proquest_journals_2102318880 pubmed_primary_30004127 crossref_primary_10_1111_vsu_12913 crossref_citationtrail_10_1111_vsu_12913 wiley_primary_10_1111_vsu_12913_VSU12913 |
| PublicationCentury | 2000 |
| PublicationDate | August 2018 2018-08-00 2018-Aug 20180801 |
| PublicationDateYYYYMMDD | 2018-08-01 |
| PublicationDate_xml | – month: 08 year: 2018 text: August 2018 |
| PublicationDecade | 2010 |
| PublicationPlace | United States |
| PublicationPlace_xml | – name: United States – name: Germantown |
| PublicationTitle | Veterinary surgery |
| PublicationTitleAlternate | Vet Surg |
| PublicationYear | 2018 |
| Publisher | Blackwell Publishing Ltd |
| Publisher_xml | – name: Blackwell Publishing Ltd |
| References | 2009; 89 1990; 19 2008; 36 2008; 7 2008; 79 1978; 39 1971; 121 1969; 129 2008; 70 1938 1985; 21 2008; 71 2010; 23 2004; 33 2017; 30 2001 1995; 23 2011; 23 1978; 147 1996; 25 2016; 45 1998; 28 1997; 61 2012 1995; 17 2011; 40 1986; 14 1997; 210 1988; 17 2005; 40 2008 1997 2011; 79 2003 2011; 38 2009; 34 1998; 38 1995; 85 1982; 117 2009; 71 1980; 1 1984; 7 2005; 5 2003; 24 1980; 60 2016; 136 2013 2009; 107 1992; 21 1998; 6 2005; 99 2005; 11 2012; 41 1973; 4 e_1_2_7_5_1 e_1_2_7_9_1 e_1_2_7_7_1 e_1_2_7_19_1 e_1_2_7_60_1 e_1_2_7_17_1 e_1_2_7_62_1 e_1_2_7_15_1 e_1_2_7_41_1 Shmon C (e_1_2_7_10_1) 2003 e_1_2_7_45_1 e_1_2_7_47_1 e_1_2_7_26_1 e_1_2_7_49_1 Denton GW (e_1_2_7_40_1) 2001 e_1_2_7_25_1 e_1_2_7_31_1 e_1_2_7_52_1 e_1_2_7_23_1 e_1_2_7_33_1 e_1_2_7_54_1 e_1_2_7_21_1 e_1_2_7_35_1 e_1_2_7_56_1 e_1_2_7_37_1 e_1_2_7_58_1 e_1_2_7_39_1 Dunning D (e_1_2_7_3_1) 2003 Lemarie RJ (e_1_2_7_11_1) 1995; 17 Kramer A (e_1_2_7_28_1) 2008 Galle PC (e_1_2_7_13_1) 1978; 147 e_1_2_7_18_1 Ali Y (e_1_2_7_43_1) 2001 e_1_2_7_16_1 e_1_2_7_61_1 e_1_2_7_14_1 e_1_2_7_42_1 e_1_2_7_63_1 Brown DC (e_1_2_7_51_1) 1997; 210 e_1_2_7_44_1 Lee JT (e_1_2_7_55_1) 1998; 6 Cockshutt J (e_1_2_7_8_1) 2003 Gibson KL (e_1_2_7_46_1) 1997; 61 e_1_2_7_48_1 e_1_2_7_27_1 e_1_2_7_29_1 Dineen P (e_1_2_7_12_1) 1969; 129 Brown DC (e_1_2_7_6_1) 2012 Haley CE (e_1_2_7_22_1) 1985; 21 Markey BK (e_1_2_7_36_1) 2013 e_1_2_7_30_1 e_1_2_7_53_1 e_1_2_7_24_1 e_1_2_7_32_1 e_1_2_7_34_1 e_1_2_7_57_1 Weese SJ (e_1_2_7_2_1) 2012 e_1_2_7_20_1 Smeak D (e_1_2_7_59_1) 1984; 7 e_1_2_7_38_1 Renberg WC (e_1_2_7_4_1) 2012 Ihrke PJ (e_1_2_7_50_1) 1978; 39 31876013 - Vet Surg. 2020 Jan;49(1):19-21 |
| References_xml | – volume: 21 start-page: 291 year: 1992 end-page: 299 article-title: In vitro evaluation of povidone‐iodine and chlorhexidine against methicillin‐resistant publication-title: J Hosp Infect. – start-page: 789 year: 2008 end-page: 793 – volume: 70 start-page: 27 year: 2008 end-page: 34 article-title: What is left to justify the use of chlorhexidine in hand hygiene? publication-title: J Hosp Infect – volume: 30 start-page: 827 year: 2017 end-page: 860 article-title: Current and emerging topical antibacterials and antiseptics: agents, action, and resistance patterns publication-title: Clin Microbiol Rev – volume: 107 start-page: 379 year: 2009 end-page: 384 article-title: The antimicrobial mechanism of electrochemically activated water against and as determined by SDS‐PAGE analysis publication-title: J Appl Microbiol – volume: 21 start-page: 991 year: 1985 end-page: 992 article-title: Bactericidal activity of antiseptics against methicillin‐resistant publication-title: J Clin Microbiol. – volume: 39 start-page: 1487 year: 1978 end-page: 1489 article-title: Microbiology of normal and seborrheic canine skin publication-title: Am J Vet Res – volume: 17 start-page: 182 year: 1988 end-page: 185 article-title: Chlorhexidine diacetate and povidone‐iodine cytotoxicity to canine embryonic fibroblasts and publication-title: Vet Surg. – volume: 1 start-page: 111 year: 1980 end-page: 124 article-title: The effect of antibacterial agents on the flora of the skin publication-title: J Hosp Infect – start-page: 149 year: 2003 end-page: 155 – volume: 4 start-page: 586 year: 1973 end-page: 589 article-title: From Phisohex to Hibiscrub publication-title: Br Med J – volume: 17 start-page: 60 year: 1988 end-page: 64 article-title: Surgical wound infection rates in dogs and cats data from a teaching hospital publication-title: Vet Surg – volume: 7 start-page: 629 year: 1984 end-page: 634 article-title: Infections in clean wounds: the roles of the surgeon, environment, and host publication-title: Compend Contin Educ Pract Vet – start-page: 135 year: 2012 end-page: 145 – volume: 7 start-page: 20 year: 2008 end-page: 27 article-title: Pitfalls in efficacy testing—how important is the validation of neutralization of chlorhexidine digluconate? publication-title: Ann Clin Microbiol Antimicrob – volume: 33 start-page: 636 year: 2004 end-page: 643 article-title: A prospective comparison between stabilized glutaraldehyde and chlorhexidine gluconate for preoperative skin antisepsis in dogs publication-title: Vet Surg – volume: 79 start-page: 313 year: 2011 end-page: 316 article-title: Time‐dependent effect of chlorhexidine surgical prep publication-title: J Hosp Infect – volume: 89 start-page: 365 year: 2009 end-page: 389 article-title: Prevention of surgical site infection publication-title: Surg Clin North Am – start-page: 105 year: 2013 end-page: 121 – volume: 85 start-page: 439 year: 1995 end-page: 445 article-title: Antiseptics and disinfectants: current issues publication-title: J Am Podiatr Med Assoc – volume: 41 start-page: 63 year: 2012 end-page: 68 article-title: Risk factors and clinical relevance of positive intraoperative bacterial cultures in dogs with total hip replacement publication-title: Vet Surg – volume: 11 start-page: 135 year: 2005 end-page: 150 article-title: Applications of electrolyzed water in agriculture & food industries publication-title: Food Sci Technol Res – volume: 210 start-page: 1302 year: 1997 end-page: 1306 article-title: Epidemiologic evaluation of postoperative wound infections in dogs and cats publication-title: J Am Vet Med Assoc – volume: 24 start-page: 225 year: 2003 end-page: 227 article-title: An investigation of the bactericidal effect of certain antiseptics and disinfectants on some hospital isolates of gram‐negative bacteria publication-title: Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol – volume: 99 start-page: 703 year: 2005 end-page: 715 article-title: Cationic antiseptics: diversity of action under a common epithet publication-title: J Appl Microbiol – year: 1997 – volume: 25 start-page: 487 year: 1996 end-page: 494 article-title: Chlorhexidine gluconate versus chloroxylenol for preoperative skin preparation in dogs publication-title: Vet Surg – volume: 71 start-page: 1934 year: 2008 end-page: 1947 article-title: Electrolyzed water and its application in the food industry publication-title: J Food Prot – volume: 117 start-page: 181 year: 1982 end-page: 186 article-title: Bactericidal activity and toxicity of iodine‐containing solutions in wounds publication-title: Arch Surg – volume: 36 start-page: 502 year: 2008 end-page: 512 article-title: Chlorhexidine‐pharmacology and clinical applications publication-title: Anaesth Intensive Care – volume: 136 start-page: 707 year: 2016 end-page: 711 article-title: Polyhexanide‐safety and efficacy as an antiseptic publication-title: Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen – start-page: 164 year: 2012 end-page: 170 – volume: 28 start-page: 233 year: 1998 end-page: 248 article-title: Antiseptics and disinfectants publication-title: Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract – volume: 5 start-page: 48 year: 2005 end-page: 55 article-title: Insufficient neutralization in testing a chlorhexidine‐containing ethanol‐based hand rub can result in a false positive efficacy assessment publication-title: BMC Infect Dis – start-page: 229 year: 2001 end-page: 253 – start-page: 113 year: 2003 end-page: 122 – start-page: 162 year: 2003 end-page: 178 – volume: 23 start-page: 462 year: 2011 end-page: 465 article-title: Comparison of three preoperative skin preparation techniques in ponies publication-title: Equine Vet Educ – volume: 129 start-page: 1181 year: 1969 end-page: 1184 article-title: An evaluation of the duration of the surgical scrub publication-title: Surg Gynecol Obstet – volume: 14 start-page: 212 year: 1986 end-page: 215 article-title: Chlorhexidine: antibacterial action and bacterial resistance publication-title: Infection – volume: 38 start-page: 408 year: 2011 end-page: 413 article-title: Peri‐operative morbidity associated with ovariohysterectomy performed as part of a third‐year veterinary surgical‐training program publication-title: J Vet Med Educ – volume: 38 start-page: 297 year: 1998 end-page: 303 article-title: Limited effectiveness of chlorhexidine based hand disinfectants against methicillin‐resistant (MRSA) publication-title: J Hosp Infect – volume: 71 start-page: 207 year: 2009 end-page: 210 article-title: Evaluation of the skin flora after chlorhexidine and povidone‐iodine preparation in neurosurgical practice publication-title: Surg Neurol – volume: 19 start-page: 14 year: 1990 end-page: 19 article-title: Comparison of three skin preparation techniques in the dog. Part 1: experimental trial publication-title: Vet Surg – start-page: 321 year: 2001 end-page: 336 – volume: 60 start-page: 27 year: 1980 end-page: 40 article-title: The epidemiology of wound infection: a 10‐year prospective study of 62,939 wounds publication-title: Surg Clin North Am – volume: 40 start-page: 515 year: 2011 end-page: 521 article-title: Presurgical hand antisepsis: concepts and current habits of veterinary surgeons publication-title: Vet Surg – volume: 45 start-page: 214 year: 2016 end-page: 222 article-title: Survey of intraoperative bacterial contamination in dogs undergoing elective orthopedic surgery publication-title: Vet Surg – start-page: 301 year: 1938 end-page: 318 article-title: The bacteriology of normal skin; a new quantitative test applied to a study of the bacterial flora and the disinfectant action of mechanical cleansing publication-title: J Infect Dis – volume: 17 start-page: 1339 year: 1995 end-page: 1352 article-title: Antiseptics and disinfectants in small animal practice publication-title: Compend Contin Educ Pract Vet – volume: 79 start-page: 36 year: 2008 end-page: 38 article-title: The use of electrochemically activated saline as a uterine instillation in pony mares publication-title: J S Afr Vet Assoc – volume: 19 start-page: 20 year: 1990 end-page: 23 article-title: Comparison of three skin preparation techniques. Part 2: clinical trial in 100 dogs publication-title: Vet Surg – volume: 23 start-page: 251 year: 1995 end-page: 269 article-title: APIC guidelines for handwashing and hand antisepsis in health care settings publication-title: Am J Infect Control – start-page: 340 year: 2012 end-page: 348 – volume: 40 start-page: 1650 year: 2005 end-page: 1656 article-title: Antiseptic “resistance”: real or perceived threat? publication-title: Clin Infect Dis – volume: 6 start-page: 20 year: 1998 end-page: 29 article-title: Contemporary wound infection surveillance issues publication-title: New Horiz – volume: 34 start-page: 940 year: 2009 end-page: 941 article-title: Surgical preparation solutions and preoperative skin disinfection publication-title: J Hand Surg Am – volume: 121 start-page: 251 year: 1971 end-page: 254 article-title: Wound infections after preoperative depilatory versus razor preparation publication-title: Am J Surg – volume: 147 start-page: 215 year: 1978 end-page: 218 article-title: Reassessment of the surgical scrub publication-title: Surg Gynecol Obstet – volume: 45 start-page: 1118 year: 2016 end-page: 1119 article-title: Antibacterial efficacy of several surgical hand preparation products used by veterinary students publication-title: Vet Surg – volume: 23 start-page: 17 year: 2010 end-page: 27 article-title: Review on the efficacy, safety and clinical applications of polihexanide, a modern wound antiseptic publication-title: Skin Pharmacol Physiol – volume: 61 start-page: 154 year: 1997 end-page: 156 article-title: Comparison of two pre‐surgical skin preparation techniques publication-title: Can J Vet Res – ident: e_1_2_7_17_1 doi: 10.1111/j.1532-950X.2011.00846.x – ident: e_1_2_7_56_1 doi: 10.1136/bmj.4.5892.586 – ident: e_1_2_7_23_1 doi: 10.1016/0195-6701(92)90139-D – ident: e_1_2_7_58_1 doi: 10.1093/infdis/63.3.301 – start-page: 149 volume-title: Textbook of Small Animal Surgery year: 2003 ident: e_1_2_7_8_1 – ident: e_1_2_7_30_1 doi: 10.4102/jsava.v79i1.238 – ident: e_1_2_7_20_1 doi: 10.1086/502194 – ident: e_1_2_7_7_1 doi: 10.1111/j.1532-950X.1996.tb01448.x – ident: e_1_2_7_16_1 doi: 10.1016/S0195-6701(08)60008-0 – ident: e_1_2_7_42_1 doi: 10.1111/j.1532-950X.1988.tb00995.x – ident: e_1_2_7_52_1 doi: 10.3138/jvme.38.4.408 – start-page: 105 volume-title: Clinical Veterinary Microbiology year: 2013 ident: e_1_2_7_36_1 – ident: e_1_2_7_26_1 doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2672.2005.02664.x – volume: 21 start-page: 991 year: 1985 ident: e_1_2_7_22_1 article-title: Bactericidal activity of antiseptics against methicillin‐resistant Staphylococcus aureus publication-title: J Clin Microbiol. doi: 10.1128/jcm.21.6.991-992.1985 – ident: e_1_2_7_53_1 doi: 10.1111/j.1532-950X.1988.tb00278.x – ident: e_1_2_7_41_1 doi: 10.1177/0310057X0803600404 – ident: e_1_2_7_63_1 doi: 10.1016/j.surneu.2007.10.026 – ident: e_1_2_7_48_1 doi: 10.1001/archsurg.1982.01380260051009 – ident: e_1_2_7_38_1 doi: 10.1111/j.1532-950X.1990.tb01136.x – ident: e_1_2_7_54_1 doi: 10.1016/j.suc.2009.01.001 – start-page: 229 volume-title: Disinfection, Sterilization, and Preservation year: 2001 ident: e_1_2_7_43_1 – ident: e_1_2_7_61_1 doi: 10.1111/j.1532-950X.2011.00934.x – ident: e_1_2_7_35_1 doi: 10.1111/j.1532-950X.1990.tb01137.x – ident: e_1_2_7_44_1 doi: 10.1016/0196-6553(95)90070-5 – ident: e_1_2_7_57_1 doi: 10.1016/0195-6701(80)90043-2 – start-page: 135 volume-title: Veterinary Surgery Small Animal year: 2012 ident: e_1_2_7_6_1 – start-page: 789 volume-title: Wallhäussers Praxis der Sterilisation, Desinfektion, Antiseptik und Konservierung year: 2008 ident: e_1_2_7_28_1 – ident: e_1_2_7_15_1 doi: 10.1186/1471-2334-5-48 – ident: e_1_2_7_25_1 doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2672.2009.04233.x – ident: e_1_2_7_49_1 doi: 10.1016/0002-9610(71)90199-1 – volume: 210 start-page: 1302 year: 1997 ident: e_1_2_7_51_1 article-title: Epidemiologic evaluation of postoperative wound infections in dogs and cats publication-title: J Am Vet Med Assoc doi: 10.2460/javma.1997.210.09.1302 – start-page: 164 volume-title: Veterinary Surgery Small Animal year: 2012 ident: e_1_2_7_4_1 – ident: e_1_2_7_29_1 doi: 10.4045/tidsskr.14.1041 – ident: e_1_2_7_37_1 doi: 10.1111/vsu.12438 – volume: 147 start-page: 215 year: 1978 ident: e_1_2_7_13_1 article-title: Reassessment of the surgical scrub publication-title: Surg Gynecol Obstet – volume: 17 start-page: 1339 year: 1995 ident: e_1_2_7_11_1 article-title: Antiseptics and disinfectants in small animal practice publication-title: Compend Contin Educ Pract Vet – ident: e_1_2_7_14_1 doi: 10.1186/1476-0711-7-20 – ident: e_1_2_7_5_1 doi: 10.1111/j.1532-950X.2004.04086.x – ident: e_1_2_7_27_1 doi: 10.1159/000318264 – ident: e_1_2_7_33_1 doi: 10.4315/0362-028X-71.9.1934 – ident: e_1_2_7_21_1 doi: 10.1016/S0195-6701(98)90078-0 – ident: e_1_2_7_62_1 doi: 10.1016/j.jhin.2011.08.016 – start-page: 113 volume-title: Textbook of Small Animal Surgery year: 2003 ident: e_1_2_7_3_1 – ident: e_1_2_7_34_1 doi: 10.1086/430063 – ident: e_1_2_7_45_1 doi: 10.7547/87507315-85-8-439 – ident: e_1_2_7_19_1 doi: 10.1007/BF01644264 – start-page: 162 volume-title: Textbook of Small Animal Surgery year: 2003 ident: e_1_2_7_10_1 – volume: 7 start-page: 629 year: 1984 ident: e_1_2_7_59_1 article-title: Infections in clean wounds: the roles of the surgeon, environment, and host publication-title: Compend Contin Educ Pract Vet – volume: 39 start-page: 1487 year: 1978 ident: e_1_2_7_50_1 article-title: Microbiology of normal and seborrheic canine skin publication-title: Am J Vet Res doi: 10.2460/ajvr.1978.39.09.1487 – volume: 61 start-page: 154 year: 1997 ident: e_1_2_7_46_1 article-title: Comparison of two pre‐surgical skin preparation techniques publication-title: Can J Vet Res – volume: 129 start-page: 1181 year: 1969 ident: e_1_2_7_12_1 article-title: An evaluation of the duration of the surgical scrub publication-title: Surg Gynecol Obstet – ident: e_1_2_7_60_1 doi: 10.1016/S0039-6109(16)42031-1 – ident: e_1_2_7_32_1 doi: 10.3136/fstr.11.135 – start-page: 340 volume-title: Infectious Diseases of the Dog and Cat year: 2012 ident: e_1_2_7_2_1 – ident: e_1_2_7_9_1 doi: 10.1016/j.jhsa.2009.03.008 – ident: e_1_2_7_47_1 doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3292.2010.00203.x – ident: e_1_2_7_18_1 doi: 10.1128/CMR.00112-16 – ident: e_1_2_7_24_1 doi: 10.1111/vsu.12566 – start-page: 321 volume-title: Disinfection, Sterilization, and Preservation year: 2001 ident: e_1_2_7_40_1 – volume: 6 start-page: 20 year: 1998 ident: e_1_2_7_55_1 article-title: Contemporary wound infection surveillance issues publication-title: New Horiz – ident: e_1_2_7_31_1 – ident: e_1_2_7_39_1 doi: 10.1016/S0195-5616(98)82003-2 – reference: 31876013 - Vet Surg. 2020 Jan;49(1):19-21 |
| SSID | ssj0009443 |
| Score | 2.2252789 |
| Snippet | Objective
To compare the antimicrobial efficacy of a 2% chlorhexidine gluconate and 70% ethanol solution (CG+A) with that of F10 Skin Prep Solution (F10) and... To compare the antimicrobial efficacy of a 2% chlorhexidine gluconate and 70% ethanol solution (CG+A) with that of F10 Skin Prep Solution (F10) and... ObjectiveTo compare the antimicrobial efficacy of a 2% chlorhexidine gluconate and 70% ethanol solution (CG+A) with that of F10 Skin Prep Solution (F10) and... OBJECTIVE: To compare the antimicrobial efficacy of a 2% chlorhexidine gluconate and 70% ethanol solution (CG+A) with that of F10 Skin Prep Solution (F10) and... |
| SourceID | proquest pubmed crossref wiley |
| SourceType | Aggregation Database Index Database Enrichment Source Publisher |
| StartPage | 792 |
| SubjectTerms | Animals Anti-Infective Agents, Local - therapeutic use antimicrobial properties Antiseptics bacterial contamination Chlorhexidine Chlorhexidine - analogs & derivatives Chlorhexidine - therapeutic use Colonization Contamination Counting Dogs Dogs - surgery electrochemistry Ethanol Ethanol - therapeutic use Female gluconates Hysterectomy - methods Hysterectomy - veterinary Ovariectomy - methods Ovariectomy - veterinary patients Population studies Preoperative Care - methods Preoperative Care - veterinary Prospective Studies Random Allocation randomized clinical trials Replication Sampling Skin Skin - microbiology Skin preparations spaying students Surgery |
| Title | Comparative efficacy of three antiseptics as surgical skin preparations in dogs |
| URI | https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111%2Fvsu.12913 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30004127 https://www.proquest.com/docview/2102318880 https://www.proquest.com/docview/2070238025 https://www.proquest.com/docview/2153628161 |
| Volume | 47 |
| WOSCitedRecordID | wos000444424400006&url=https%3A%2F%2Fcvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com%2F%23%21%2Fsearch%3Fho%3Df%26include.ft.matches%3Dt%26l%3Dnull%26q%3D |
| hasFullText | 1 |
| inHoldings | 1 |
| isFullTextHit | |
| isPrint | |
| journalDatabaseRights | – providerCode: PRVWIB databaseName: Wiley Online Library Full Collection 2020 customDbUrl: eissn: 1532-950X dateEnd: 99991231 omitProxy: false ssIdentifier: ssj0009443 issn: 0161-3499 databaseCode: DRFUL dateStart: 19970101 isFulltext: true titleUrlDefault: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com providerName: Wiley-Blackwell |
| link | http://cvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwpV1JT9wwFH6iQw-9tOydsshUHHqJlNXxqKcKOuLAJmDQ3CLbsRGiyqAJU6n_vp-dTACVIiRuifIcOfZbvuc8fybaA2YvIxvrQLgdMoDUuFKhCngZhTaJkUErf2rJUX5yIsbjwdkCfZ_vhWn4IboFN2cZ3l87A5eqfmTkjtcRwcqdWLsYQ2_THi0enA9HRw-cu2lTNBe5JRZ0oyUWcoU8XeOn4egfjPkUsvqYM_z0pt4u0ccWarIfjW4s04KpVmjlytW_-E247Lj9r75Kp_sPJODMOFYJqf-wiWX3mGrDMPo3tSt_0TWTNatnU-8vWX17U7G7qWmaQn8Z7svJdb1Go-HPy_3DoD1qIdCJ4EmQIbFINdCXzJTQiPsmFNpyE0lkOLlSPLRlaXVsMgS3Mkdawa3b-iSslBnXUbJOvWpSmc_EEBRVkimTDixPAb4GmcwV52IQ42Vo0qdv8xEvdMtD7o7D-FXM8xGMVeHHqk9fO9G7hnzjOaGt-bQVrf3VhUtk4a3gnPq02z2G5bjfIbIykxlk4O0AWAD6XpBBQOCxgAb1aaNRia4nSejJynJ8kJ_5_3exuLoY-YsvrxfdpA_AZqKpNdyi3v10Zrbpvf6NCZ_u0Lt8LHZahf8LNNkBIA |
| linkProvider | Wiley-Blackwell |
| linkToHtml | http://cvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwpV1bT9swFD5CZRK8sK3curFhEA-8RMrVcaW9TN0qppUyDYp4i2LHRtWmFDV00v79PjtpALFNSLwlynHk2OfyHef4M9ERMHsRmFB5wu6QAaTGlfSlx4vAN1GIDFq6U0tG6Xgsrq7631bow3IvTM0P0S64Wctw_toauF2QvmflltgR0coeWbsaQ42SDq1--j6cjO5Id-O6ai6wayzoR8MsZCt52sYP49EjkPkQs7qgM3z5vO6-oo0GbLKPtXa8phVddql7aStg3DZcdtr8Wd-ks8EdDTjTllciV7_ZzLBbTLZmGP9pZQtgVMXyilWLufOYrPoxLdnNXNdNocEM98XsutqiyfDzxeDEaw5b8FQkeOQlSC1iBfyVJ1IoRH7tC2W4DnLkOKmU3DdFYVSoE4S3IkViwY3d_CRMnidcBdE2dcpZqXeJISzKKJE67hseA371kzyVnIt-iJehSY-Ol0OeqYaJ3B6I8TNbZiQYq8yNVY8OW9Gbmn7jb0J7y3nLGgusMpvKwl_BPfXooH0M27E_RPJSzxaQgb8DZAHs-48MQgIPBVSoRzu1TrQ9iXxHV5big9zU_7uL2eX5xF28ebroPq2dXJyOstGX8de3tA6kJurKwz3q3M4X-h29UL8w-fP3jd7_AYk7BCg |
| linkToPdf | http://cvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwpV1LT9wwEB4hQFUvvNrCUqBu1UMvkfJ0HKkXBKxAbLeo7SJuUezYCIGyqw2LxL_ns5MNRaWoUm-JMo4cex7fOOPPRJ-B2cvAhMoTdocMIDWupC89Xga-iUJk0NKdWjJIh0NxcZGdLdDX-V6Yhh-iW3CzluH8tTVwPSnNb1ZuiR0RreyRtUtxknGY5dLhj_5o8Ei6GzdVc4FdY0E_WmYhW8nTNX4aj_4AmU8xqws6_dX_6-4arbRgk-032rFOC7raoI1zWwHjtuGyb-2f9Tf0_eCRBpxpyytRqHs2NuwWk60Zxv-qtgUwqmZFzerZ1HlMVl9fVWwy1U1TaDDDfTm-rN_SqH_06-DYaw9b8FQkeOQlSC1iBfxVJFIoRH7tC2W4DgrkOKmU3DdlaVSoE4S3MkViwY3d_CRMUSRcBdE7WqzGld4ihrAoo0TqODM8BvzKkiKVnIssxMvQpEdf5kOeq5aJ3B6IcZPPMxKMVe7GqkefOtFJQ7_xnNDOfN7y1gLr3Kay8FdwTz362D2G7dgfIkWlxzPIwN8BsgD2vSCDkMBDARXq0WajE11PIt_RlaX4IDf1f-9ifv5z5C62_130A706O-zng5Ph6Xt6DaAmmsLDHVq8nc70Li2rO8z9dK9V-wcN7wOj |
| openUrl | ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparative+efficacy+of+three+antiseptics+as+surgical+skin+preparations+in+dogs&rft.jtitle=Veterinary+surgery&rft.au=Boucher%2C+Charles&rft.au=Henton%2C+Maryke+M&rft.au=Becker%2C+Piet+J&rft.au=Kirberger%2C+Robert+M&rft.date=2018-08-01&rft.eissn=1532-950X&rft.volume=47&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=792&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111%2Fvsu.12913&rft_id=info%3Apmid%2F30004127&rft.externalDocID=30004127 |
| thumbnail_l | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=0161-3499&client=summon |
| thumbnail_m | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=0161-3499&client=summon |
| thumbnail_s | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=0161-3499&client=summon |