section name header

Evidence summaries

Water for Wound Cleansing

Using tap water to cleanse acute wounds in adults or children may not increase or reduce infection. Cleansing wounds per se may not increase healing or reduce infection. Level of evidence: "C"

A Cochrane review [Abstract] 1 included 11 studies. Seven trials compared rates of infection and healing in wounds cleansed with water and normal saline; three trials compared cleansing with no cleansing and one trial compared procaine spirit with water. There were no standard criteria for assessing wound infection across the trials, which limited the ability to pool the data. The major comparisons were water with normal saline, and tap water with no cleansing.

For chronic wounds, the risk of developing an infection when cleansed with tap water compared with normal saline was 0.16, (95% CI 0.01 to 2.96) demonstrating no difference between the two groups. The use of tap water to cleanse acute wounds in adults and children was not associated with a statistically significant difference in infection when compared to saline (adults: RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.04; children: RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.43 to 2.64). No statistically significant differences in infection rates when wounds were cleansed with tap water or not cleansed at all were identified (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.07 to 16.50). Likewise, there was no difference in the infection rate in episiotomy wounds cleansed with water or procaine spirit. The use of isotonic saline, distilled water and boiled water for cleansing open fractures also did not demonstrate a statistically significant difference in the number of fractures that were infected.

Comment: The quality of evidence is downgraded by study quality (inadequate or unclear allocation concealment) and by inconsistency (heterogeneity in results in different populations).

    References

    • Fernandez R, Griffiths R. Water for wound cleansing. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012;2():CD003861. [PubMed]

Primary/Secondary Keywords