The PINS Trial: a prospective randomized clinical trial comparing a traditional versus an emollient skincare regimen for the care of pin-sites in patients with circular frames.

David Ferguson, Paul Harwood, Victoria Allgar, Anu Roy, Patrick Foster, Martin Taylor, Elizabeth Moulder, Hemant Sharma

Journal: The bone & joint journal 2021;103-B(2):279-285

PMID: 33517738

Abstract

AIMS

Pin-site infection remains a significant problem for patients treated by external fixation. A randomized trial was undertaken to compare the weekly use of alcoholic chlorhexidine (CHX) for pin-site care with an emollient skin preparation in patients with a tibial fracture treated with a circular frame.

METHODS

Patients were randomized to use either 0.5% CHX or Dermol (DML) 500 emollient pin-site care. A skin biopsy was taken from the tibia during surgery to measure the dermal and epidermal thickness and capillary, macrophage, and T-cell counts per high-powered field. The pH and hydration of the skin were measured preoperatively, at follow-up, and if pin-site infection occurred. Pin-site infection was defined using a validated clinical system.

RESULTS

Out of 116 patients who were enrolled in the study, 23 patients (40%) in the CHX group and 26 (44%) in the DML group had at least one bad or ugly pin-site infection. This difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.71). There was no significant relationship between pH or hydration of the skin and pin-site infection. The epidermal thickness was found to be significantly greater in patients who had a pin-site infection compared with those who did not (p = 0.01). Skin irritation requiring a change of treatment occurred in four patients (7%) using CHX, and none using DML.

CONCLUSION

We found no significant difference in the incidence of pin-site infection between the CHX and DML treatment groups. Dermol appeared to offer a small but significant advantage in terms of tolerability. We did not find a significant association between patient or treatment related factors and pin-site infection. It is therefore difficult to make specific recommendations based upon these results. The use of either cleaning agent appears to be appropriate. Cite this article: 2021;103-B(2):279-285.

Address: Trauma & Orthopaedics, James Cook University Hospital, Middlesbrough, UK.; Limb Reconstruction Unit, Leeds General Infirmary, Leeds, UK.; Orthopaedics, Hull and East Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust, Hull, UK.; United Lincolnshire Hospitals NHS Trust, Lincoln, UK.
Bant logo

© Copyright 2026, Nutrition Evidence

NED wishes to thank the following organisations for their support:

We use cookies to improve your experience and analyze site traffic with Google Analytics. By continuing to use our site, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more.