The effects of daily chlorhexidine bathing on cutaneous bacterial isolates: a pilot study

Figures & data

Table 1 Chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) exposure versus measured outcomes

CHG exposure	Swabs (n)	Bacterial colony count per swaba	Bacterial phenotypes per swab (n)a	CoNS isolates (n)	CHG MIC50 (μg/mL)a
None	4	5145 (15–12 870)	2 (1–3)	3	1 (1–2)
Moderate (1–14 CHG baths)	15	15 (0–30 750)	1 (0–3)	11	1 (0.5–2)
Heavy (>14 CHG baths)	10	0 (0–7500)	0 (0–1)	4	1.5 (1–4)

Notes:

a Median values provided; numbers in parentheses reflect range values.

Abbreviations: CoNS, coagulase-negative staphylococci; MIC₅₀, median minimum inhibitory concentration.

Table 2 Comparison of antimicrobial susceptibility in isolates with a minimum inhibitory concentration of chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG MIC) ≤1 μg/mL and isolates with a CHG MIC ≥2 μg/mL

Antimicrobial agent	% susceptible to specified agenta		P-valueb
	CHG MIC ≤ 1 μg/mL (n = 11)	CHG MIC ≥ 2 μg/mL (n = 5)
Amoxicillin-clavulanate	100	80	0.31
Cefoxitin	72	20	0.11
Cefazolin	100	20	0.003
Ceftriaxone	72	40	0.30
Ciprofloxacin	100	20	0.003
Clindamycin	91	20	0.01
Erythromycin	45	20	0.59
Gentamicin	100	40	0.02
Penicillin	18	20	0.99
Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole	72	20	0.11

Notes:

a All isolates were susceptible to vancomycin, linezolid, and rifampin;

b from Fisher’s exact test.