Status
Conditions
Treatments
About
This study is designed to compare the infection rates in wounds irrigated with sterile normal saline to those irrigated with chlorinated tap water. The hypothesis is that the wound infection rate subsequent to irrigation with tap water is not significantly different than the infection rate for wounds irrigated with sterile normal saline.
Inclusion criteria are patients older than 1-year of age who present to the emergency department with a soft-tissue laceration requiring repair. Exclusion criteria include patients with any underlying immunocompromising illness, current use of antibiotics, puncture or bite wounds, underlying tendon or bone involvement, or wounds more than nine hours old.
Patients are randomized to have their wounds irrigated either with tap water or sterile normal saline prior to closure, controlling for the volume and irrigation method used. Structured follow-up is completed at 48 hours and 30 days to determine the presence of infection.
The primary outcome measure is the difference in wound infection rates between the two randomized groups.
Enrollment
Sex
Ages
Volunteers
Inclusion criteria
• Patients older than 1-year of age, who presented to the ED with an uncomplicated soft-tissue laceration requiring repair.
Exclusion criteria
Primary purpose
Allocation
Interventional model
Masking
660 participants in 2 patient groups
Loading...
Data sourced from clinicaltrials.gov
Clinical trials
Research sites
Resources
Legal