%0 Journal Article %A Heather Felgate %A Charlotte Quinn %A Ben Richardson %A Carol Hudson %A Dheeraj Sethi %A Sam Oddie %A Paul Clarke %A Mark Webber %T Impact of daily octenidine skin washing on antiseptic tolerance of coagulase-negative staphylococci in two neonatal intensive care units with different bathing practices %D 2022 %R 10.1101/2022.06.23.22276813 %J medRxiv %P 2022.06.23.22276813 %X Background Coagulase Negative Staphylococci (CoNS) are responsible for 80-90 % of catheter related sepsis in neonates which can cause life threatening and damaging effects. NICUs within the UK use various practices to decolonise neonates to prevent infection ranging from regular full body bathing to localised skin decontamination before insertion of indwelling devices. There is a disparity in bathing practices for infants admitted onto neonatal units, with some choosing to regularly bathe infants and others not, and some routinely washing with skin antiseptics, and others not.Aim To compare the abundance of CoNS within two UK NICUs with different approaches to skin bathing and to test their tolerances to antiseptics.Methods A collection of CoNS from two UK based NICUs with differing bathing routines for neonates were collated and tested for susceptibility to the antiseptics in use, octenidine and chlorhexidine.Findings Regular bathing of neonates in octenidine did not decrease the abundance of organisms on neonatal skin. Isolates from the unit where octenidine was in frequent use did not show any increased antiseptic tolerance. Isolates from the unit where regular bathing was not routine practice were less susceptible to both antiseptics.Conclusion Frequent whole-body skin washing with octenidine does not appear to result in a lasting reduction in numbers of organisms found on the skin but also does not appear to select for antiseptic tolerant CoNS.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis work was supported by an award from the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BB/T014644/1).Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The study protocol was reviewed by the Research Services Manager of the Norfolk and Norwich University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust and was approved as a surveillance study that did not require a formal ethics committee review.I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesAll data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors %U https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/06/25/2022.06.23.22276813.full.pdf