PetCaseFinder

Peer-reviewed veterinary case report

Does clipping hair reduce bacteria before dog joint fluid tests

By Lavallée, Justin M et al.·Published in Veterinary surgery : VS·2020·Department of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, Canada·View original on PubMed

PetCaseFinder translated the abstract of this peer-reviewed paper into plain English so pet owners can read it. We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above. How we work →

Original publication title: Influence of clipping on bacterial contamination of canine arthrocentesis sites before and after skin preparation.

Species:
dog
Skin & coatDogs

Plain-English summary

A group of shorthaired beagle-cross dogs underwent a procedure called arthrocentesis (joint fluid sampling) to check for joint issues. Some dogs had their fur clipped before the procedure, while others did not. After cleaning the skin with antiseptics, researchers found that both clipped and unclipped areas had similar levels of bacteria, meaning clipping the fur wasn't necessary for keeping the area clean. This suggests that veterinarians might not need to clip the fur before such procedures, which could save time and stress for pets.

People also search for: dog joint fluid sampling · arthrocentesis procedure for dogs · does my dog need fur clipped for surgery

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine the influence of hair removal as part of the aseptic skin preparation of canine arthrocentesis sites and to characterize the bacterial flora remaining after aseptic skin preparation. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. STUDY POPULATION: Thirteen shorthaired beagle-cross dogs. METHODS: A coin toss was used to randomly determine to have one carpus, elbow, tarsus, and stifle clipped. The contralateral side was left unclipped. Aseptic skin preparation was performed on all sites with 4% chlorhexidine followed by 70% isopropyl alcohol. The skin of each site was sampled for aerobic and anaerobic bacterial cultures before and after aseptic skin preparation. Bacterial cultures were submitted for laboratory testing to determine the colony-forming units (CFU) of bacteria and bacterial species isolated for each site. RESULTS: Each group (clipped and unclipped) included 52 sites. Aseptic skin preparation reduced bacterial CFU in both groups. There was no association between values for CFU per milliliter after skin preparation of dogs and side (P = .07), joint (P = .71), pre-aseptic skin preparation CFU (P = .94), or clipping (P = .42). Staphylococcus spp were the most common of the bacterial species cultured. CONCLUSION: In clean shorthaired dogs without visible evidence of dermatological disease, leaving arthrocentesis sites unclipped rather than performing traditional surgical clipping did not result in increased bacterial skin counts after aseptic skin preparation. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: In this study we did not find evidence to support that clipping of canine arthrocentesis sites is required for effective aseptic skin preparation. A prospective clinical trial is required to determine whether a change in practice would be associated with increased morbidity.

Find similar cases for your pet

PetCaseFinder finds other peer-reviewed reports of pets with the same symptoms, plus a plain-English summary of what was tried across them.

Search related cases →

Original publication on PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32519394/