This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on Web of Science (6)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

An Evaluation

R. W. POSTLETHWAIT, MD; M. L. DILLON, MD

AMA Arch Surg. 1964;89(3):462-465.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

The pathogenic bacteria of the skin can be responsible for postoperative wound infection and every effort is made to minimize the risk of clinical infection by utilizing an effective skin antiseptic.^2,7 The presence of bacteria in the hair follicles and sebaceous glands of the skin, however, makes eradication of all skin bacteria difficult by topically-applied antiseptics, and leaves as a practical objective a bacteria-free skin surface during operative procedures. To achieve this, the antiseptic agent should not only rapidly destroy all pathogenic species of bacteria encountered on the skin but keep the skin surface adjacent to the wound free of bacteria throughout an operative procedure. The bactericidal action of iodine has long been recognized³ but its topical use in alcoholic vehicles was associated with a significant incidence of local skin reactions. The development of water-soluble complexes of iodine, referred to as iodophors, has minimized this cutaneous toxicity.^4,6,9,10 . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
DURHAM. NC

From the Duke University Medical Center and the Veterans Administration Hospital.

Footnotes
Submitted for publication March 7, 1964.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?