What do systematic reviews say?

Intervention not reported

The intervention leads to higher surgical site infection (all wound classifications) Inspection of… (high certainty).

• Use of plastic adhesive drapes during surgery for preventing surgical site infection 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1.23 [1.02, 1.48]
  5 studies · 3082 participants
  High

Intervention not reported

The intervention showed no clear difference in surgical site infection Inspection of the wound1 ( (moderate certainty).

• Use of plastic adhesive drapes during surgery for preventing surgical site infection 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1.03 [0.66, 1.6]
  2 studies · 1113 participants
  Moderate

Early vs delayed post‐operative bathing and showering

It is very uncertain whether early changes surgical site infection compared with delayed post‐operative bathing and showering (very low certainty).

• Early versus delayed post‐operative bathing or showering to prevent wound complications 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.96 [0.62, 1.48]
  1 study · 857 participants
  Very low

Intervention not reported

The intervention probably leads to lower surgical site infection (moderate certainty).

• Antibiotic prophylaxis for preventing infectious complications in orthognathic surgery 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.42 [0.24, 0.74]
  7 studies · 472 participants
  Moderate

Intervention not reported

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Antibiotic prophylaxis for preventing infectious complications in orthognathic surgery 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Intervention not reported

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Antibiotic prophylaxis for preventing infectious complications in orthognathic surgery 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Intervention not reported

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Antibiotic prophylaxis for preventing infectious complications in orthognathic surgery 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Intervention not reported

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Antibiotic prophylaxis for preventing infectious complications in orthognathic surgery 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Intervention not reported

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Antibiotic prophylaxis for preventing infectious complications in orthognathic surgery 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Intervention not reported

The intervention showed no clear difference in surgical site infection (low certainty).

• Antibiotic prophylaxis for preventing infectious complications in orthognathic surgery 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.34 [0.09, 1.22]
  2 studies · 220 participants
  Low

Intervention not reported

• Antibiotic prophylaxis for preventing infectious complications in orthognathic surgery 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  1 study · 70 participants
  Low

Intervention not reported

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Antibiotic prophylaxis for preventing infectious complications in orthognathic surgery 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Intervention not reported

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Antibiotic prophylaxis for preventing infectious complications in orthognathic surgery 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Intervention not reported

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Devices and dressings to secure peripheral venous catheters to prevent complications 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Transparent dressing vs sticking plaster

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Devices and dressings to secure peripheral venous catheters to prevent complications 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Transparent dressing vs sticking plaster

It is very uncertain whether transparent dressing changes dislodgement/accidental removal Observation compared with sticking plaster (very low certainty).

• Devices and dressings to secure peripheral venous catheters to prevent complications 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1.34 [0.72, 2.47]
  1 study · 703 participants
  Very low

Transparent dressing vs sticking plaster

Transparent dressing showed no clear difference in phlebitis Observation compared with sticking plaster (low certainty).

• Devices and dressings to secure peripheral venous catheters to prevent complications 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.89 [0.53, 1.49]
  1 study · 703 participants
  Low

Intervention not reported

It is very uncertain whether the intervention changes dislodgement/accidental removal (very low certainty).

• Devices and dressings to secure peripheral venous catheters to prevent complications 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.4 [0.17, 0.92]
  2 studies · 278 participants
  Very low

Intervention not reported

It is very uncertain whether the intervention changes phlebitis (very low certainty).

• Devices and dressings to secure peripheral venous catheters to prevent complications 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.89 [0.47, 1.68]
  3 studies · 379 participants
  Very low

Bordered transparent dressing vs securement device

It is very uncertain whether bordered transparent dressing changes PVC failure Observation compared with securement device (very low certainty).

• Devices and dressings to secure peripheral venous catheters to prevent complications 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.86 [0.64, 1.16]
  1 study · 302 participants
  Very low