Results. The sterile water group ha

Results. The sterile water group had 92 patients and the povidone-iodine group had 94. Most children (87%) were under 12 months of age. Urine cultures were positive in 16% of children in the povidone-iodine group and in 18% in the water group. There was no significant difference in signs and symptoms between the 2 groups. There was no significant association between solution preparation and cultures on univariate regression analysis. Conclusions. Cleaning the periurethral area of children with sterile water prior to catheterization is not inferior to cleaning with povidone-iodine.

結果 (繁體中文) 1:

結果。無菌水組有92例患者和聚維酮碘組有94大多數兒童（87％）為12個月以下的年齡。尿培養
在聚維酮碘組的兒童的16％和水組中18％為陽性。有2組之間的症狀和體徵無顯著差異。有溶液的配製和文化上的單因素回歸分析之間沒有顯著關聯。結論。之前清潔導尿用無菌水兒的尿道周圍區並不遜色於用碘伏清洗。

結果 (繁體中文) 2:

結果。無菌水組有92名患者，波維多-碘組有94例。大多數兒童 （87%）未滿12個月。尿培養
在16%的兒童中，在波維多尼碘組和18%的水組兒童中呈陽性。兩組體征和症狀無顯著差異。在單變數迴歸分析中，溶液製備與培養物之間沒有顯著關聯。結論。在導管化前用無菌水清潔兒童腹腔區域，不遜色于用波維酮碘清洗。

結果 (繁體中文) 3:

結果。無菌水組92例，聚維酮碘組94例。大多數兒童（87%）在12個月以下尿培養
聚維酮碘組和水組分別有16%和18%的兒童呈陽性。兩組症狀體征無顯著性差异。單因素回歸分析顯示，溶液製備與培養之間無顯著相關性。結論。導尿前用無菌水清洗小兒尿道周圍，並不亞於用聚維酮碘清洗。